ACN15596 Final Study Vol02 Pt03

Description of document: US Army Developments Command, Special Operations
Agency Report: Doctrine for Captured/Detained United

States Military Personnel, Short Title: USPOW
ACN 15596, March 1972
AD-521596, Final Study, Volume II: Main Report Part III
Requested date: October 1998
Released date: August 2009
Posted date: 17-November-2009
Source of document: Defense Technical Information Center

Attn: DTIC-RSM, FOIA Manager
8725 John J. Kingman Road, Suite 0944
Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6218
Note: See following page for list of report sections available from
governmentattic.org
The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials
made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its
principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however,
there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and
its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or
damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the
governmentattic.org web site or in this file. The public records published on the site were obtained from
government agencies using proper legal channels. Each document is identified as to the source. Any concerns
about the contents of the site should be directed to the agency originating the document in question.
GovernmentAttic.org is not responsible for the contents of documents published on the website.
US ARMY PRISONER OF WAR DOCTRINE REPORT
Doctrine For Captured/Detained United States Military Personnel, Short Title: USPOW
ACN 15596, March 1972
United States Army Combat Developments Command, Special Operations Agency
This file is: AD-521596, Final Study, Volume II: Main Report Part III – 5.5 MB
The other files available on governmentattic.org are:
AD-521594, Final Study, Volume I: Executive Summary – 1.7 MB
Final Study, Volume II: Main Report Part I – 13.1 MB
AD-521595, Final Study, Volume II: Main Report Part II – 14.1 MB
AD-521597, Final Study, Volume III – 5.3 MB
AD-521598, Final Study, Volume IV – 6.6 MB

. lARCH 1~72
AeN 15596
DOCTRIIE FOR CAPTURED/DETAilED UNITED STATES

M~UTARY PERSONNEL (U)
( Short Title: USPOW (U) )

. ......
'."' • FINAL STUDY .
VOLUME II
MAIN REPORT
PARTm
APPENDIX A, STUDY DmECTIVE

APPENDIX B, ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF ANALYSIS
APPE~IX C, FOLLOW-ON ACTION
APPil:NDIX D, REFERENCES
APPENDIX E, DISTRIBUTION
APPENDIX F, METHODOLOGY
APPENDIX G, DATA
UNITED STATES ARMY
COMBAT DEVELOPMENTS COM lAND
SPECIAL OPERATIONS AGENCY
DISTRIBUTION STATEIENT
GllOUP 1
Excluded
c .....1fieat!""
USACDC CONTROL NUMBER CDcSQA-S-0200-'12
17-Apr-2009
This document has
COpy 7~ OF 113 COPIES
been declassified lAW

EO 129~8, as amended, per ...
Army letter dated March 5, 2009
UNCLASSIFIED
IARCII 1~12 I AD
ACN 15596
DOCTRINE FOR CAPTURED/DETAINED UNITED STATES
. .. MILITARY PERSONNEL (U)
( Short Title: USPOW (U) )

FINAL STUDY
VOLUME II
MAIN REPORT
PARTm
APPENDIX A, STUDY DIRECTIVE

APPENDIX B, ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF ANALYSIS
APPENDIX C, FOLLOW-ON ACTION
APPENDIX D, REFERENCES
APPENDIX E. DISTRIBUTION
APPENDIX F, METHODOLOOY
APPENDIX G, DATA
UNITEi STATES ARMY
COMBAT DEVELOPMENTS COMMAND
SPECIAL OPERATIONS AGENCY
II
DISTRIIUTIIN STATEMENT ESPIOIAGE STATEMEIT
USACDC CONTROL NUMBER CDCSOA-S-0200-72
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per
,;. TABLE 0F CONTENTS·-·
, .
V0LUME I·
Executive Summary
VGLUME'II ..
, ,
Part ·1
Chapter 1 - Introduction,
Chapter 2.- Cammunist Prisoner' ef:War·Management Principles
Chapter 3 - .National/DOD Policy
Part 2
Chapter 4 - Pre-Internment
Chapter 5 - Internment
Chapter 6 - Postinternment
Chapter 7.~ Conclusions and Recommendations "I.,
Part 3.
Appendix A - Study Directive
:Appendix B - Essential Elements of Analysis
'Appendi x C - Fo 11 aW-0n Act; on '
Append; x 0 -. Reference . '.
Appendix E - Distribution
Appendix F - Methadalagy. ..'
.:.-'
Ap~endix G - Data "
VO~UME. III
~
Appendix H - 9iscussian/Analysis Appendix:- Pre-Internm~nt Ph,ase

Appendix I - lHscussiontAnalysi·s-Appendi'.( - ·Internment Phase ..
Appendix J - Discussion/Analysis Appendix - Postinternment Phase
" t ",;."
..,
VOLUME IV
-~ " , : ~, ~: .
Appendi x K - ,Po H ctes. ,and.·.f>.roc-edures .:.~:-:Q.ther lJS :A-rmed 'Se'rilfces .
_ .Appimdi x L - .Ra~:e Jilf ,P,rj.vate' .ancbinternat.lona 1 Organ; zations ...
~pendix -M - Coordination ·Appendix (Delete upon Study Pu~l1cati«?~) "
17..Apr-2009
This document has
i;i been declassified lAW'
fI EO 12958, as amended, per
TABLE OF. CONTENTS...
VOLUME' II
PART 3
TITL~ PAG~ . . .' i
TASLE .. OF CONTENTS. .. iii
Fl GURES. • •. ' . '. • • •..• • • '. ,., ": .• vi

, ..
APPENDIX A - ~ Study Directive A-l
ANNEX I - Study Di recti ve • • • • . . . • • • A- I -.1
ANNEX II - Change to.Study Plan . . . • . • A-II-l
ANNEX III - Study Plan. ; . . ', ••• " , ,'. A-III:-1
APPENDIX B - (U)' Essential El$ments of .Analysis, B-,l
Genera 1 • , • • • • . .'. • • • • .• • • . • . " B-1
Essential Elements of Analysis .• B-1
APPENDIX C - ~.FG11oW-On Action . . C-1
Gener.al • . • '. . . . . . • . . I • • • • • • C-1
Considerations for Presentation of Doctrine . C-1
Article 31 Warning During Debriefing. ", . :' C-4
Ev~cuat1on Procedures . . C-12
Pe,cetime Detention • • C-1S
Speci al Staff Act; vi ty • • . . • , . t-17
Recommendati ens . • •• ....,... • • C-20
APPENDIX D - ,(U) Reference 0-1.

"
·APP~NDIX' E' - (U) Distribut1on . . ,• "

E-1
APPEN Iill X F - ( U) Methodology • F-1:
. 1ntreduct1 on . .- • '. • . . F-1
Major Tasks • • • • F-l
Data Cell ect; on • , , , • • , . F-l
Da ta Sources. • • • F-4
De.elQpmental Step~ F-S" ,
Analytic Techniques " . ., ' .... P.~7'"
17-Apr-2009
This do'cument has
been declassified lAW iv
TABLE QF CQNTENTS .'
VOLUME II (Cant.ld) .
PART·3 (Cent'd)-
PAGE
APPENDIX 6 • (U) ·Data • • . • , •• " • G-1 '

ANNEX I - CQNARC '8rarJch School Respanses·., , • • • • Goo 1-1
CONARC. Questiannaire •• o' .' ••• ' ••••• • 6-I-a-1
CONARC Pas i t.i an • .. • • • • -. • • • • '.' ... • G-I-b-l
Canso11dated 8ranch School Responses ••• G-I-c-l
ANNEX II - 8CT/AIT/Active Unit Questiennaire ••• G-II-l
ANNEX III - ~rmer Prisaner.ef War.Questionnatre ••• · G-III-1
ANNEX I V - 8as i c and Advanced aff; cer Ce","rse's ·POI. • • . G-iV-l
8asic·Officer Ceurse Analys;s • • • •• . G-IV-a-l
Advanced .8ff; cer Course Analysis. • .. .. • • 0 •
G-IV-b-l
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, 'as amended, per v
FIGURES
,
"
PAGE
29 • Methodo 1ogy F-9
.... ' ..."

. ;
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW vi
Army letter dated March 5,
2009
APPENDIX A
~. STUDY DI-RECTIVE APPENDIX
Attached as Annexes to th1S Appenalx are ~he following documents:

1. ANNEX I - (U) Study Directive
2. ANNEX II - (U) Change to Study Plan
3. ANNI:.X III - ~ Study Plan
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per A.. l
ANNEX I
(U) STUDY DIRECTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
HEADQUARTERS
UNITED STATES ARMY C~BAT'DEVELOPMENTS COMMAND
Fort.Belvoir, Virginia 22060 .
CDCC9-S'
S~BJECT: Doctrine for Captured/Detained Unit~d States Military,.Personnel
SEE.DISTRIBUTION
1. Genera I.
The Instltute for Strategic and Stab,lity Operations will undert~ke a
study whi.ch will develop Joint doctrlne for captured/detained United
States, military personnel.
2. Purpose.
The purpose,o~.the study is to develop proposed joint and Ar~ qoc~
trine for captured/detained US military personnel applicable to both
pea~e'and war time situations including all levels and intensities of,
confli ct.
3. Qbjective and Scope.
The study will synthesize all current pOlicies and procedu'r'es per-
taining te captured/detained US military personnel at national, pepart-,
ment of Defense and other 'services 'levels; detennine and establish require-
ments for new joint service doctrinal literature and/or modification of .
existing doctrinal literature; and develop necessary Joint doctrine~ Doc-.
'trine for military personnel classified as missing or defectors will
b~ adEiressed only'to the extent that these inaiv1dua1s .are involved 1n
a captive role and/or the repatriat1pn process. The study will address
three specific areas: '
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW A-1-1.
CDCCD-S
SUBJECT: Doctrine for Captured/Detained United States Military Personnel
a. During the training phase and , prior to int~rnment.
"
" , ~ .
b. Conduct during internment, and' doctrine and policy applicable
to trea'tment, release •. recovery or return.
c. Doctrine and policy for captured/aetained US military personnel
following their recovery or return. (Post-Internment Pha~e).
4. Responsib,lities.
a. ISSO, is proponent Jor, the study,.
b. Assistance will be proviaed by other USACDC institutes and groups
upon request by ISSO. Conflicts in priorities will be forwarded to this
Headquarters for adjustment.
5. References.
A partial lishng is at Inclosure I. Additional references may be
added at the discretion of CO, USACDCISSO.
6. Assumptions.
.' ..
a. US military personnel will continue to face the threat of eapttJre
or detention during peace,time as wen ~s war. , I
b~ Dther assumptions deemed necessary will be approved by this Head-

quarters. ''. " ,.... '
. "
7. Gui dance.
a. Field visits may be required to sele~ted areas for the collection
of data. Requirements for travel wi 11 be determined by availabi1,i,ty.of .
da ta, importance to the study, and avai 1abi 11 ty of t.i me and funds. CDC
liaison Officers may be used to collect data to reduce travel requirements.
b •. Interv.ieWs wilt be condu'cted with .se1·ec~ed US military personnel,
where possible, in order t.o l:ibtain the benefit of their. personal experiences
which have relevance for the study. .' ,
c. Analysis w,ill ~e 'made of senHlr officer ~ebriefi.ngs, le,ssQ~s ,.
learned, after-action reports, and staff 'studies relevant to .captored:
or·detained US mi.litarY personnel'.' ' . ,. . .
17-Apr..2009
This document has A-I-2
Army letter dated Marc.h 5, 2009
CDCCO-S
SUBJECT: Dactri.ne for Captured/Detained United States Mil; tary Personnel..
d. Althoug~.national policy applicable ta captured US personnel is
beyond the mission of USACDC, recolJl'llendations or conunents, if a'ny, re-
sulting from the study which bear on national ~o11~ will be reported.
e. Study will not infringe upon US Air Force escape.and evasion
doctrine respansibility. However. the study report may include proposed
A~ input to change or mod~fy thlS Joint ~actrlne.
f. Input from other servlces and governmental agencies may be.oQtained

through existing liaison channels.
8. Admlnistration •.
a. Coordination and o~er communication will be accomplished as
pravided in USACDC Regulation 71-1.
b. Schedule of.milestones:
(l) Complete Study Plan: One month following distribution af t~is
di.rective.,
(2) Commence Study: Upon approval of study plan.
(3) In-Process Reviews: As scheduled by the study plan at critical
poin~s of the study.
(4) Coordination Draft: Nine mont~s after commencement of study.

(5) Complete Coordination and Submit Final Draft: Two months after
completian af study.
c. Distribution will be in accordance with USACDC RegUlation 310-2.
9. Correlation.
This action is deslgnated as USACDC Action Control Number 15596 and
supports the following:
a. Anny Combat Develapments Program: Anny-75.
b. Study IIAnyty-7511 USACDC ACN J189.
c. Anyty Tasks: High-Intenslty Conflict
Mid-Intensity Conflict
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW A-I-3
CDCCD-S
SUBJECT: ~octrine for .Captured/Detained United States MilitarY.,Personnel' .'
Low-Intensity Co~flict, Type I
" .
Low-Intensity'Conflict, Type II
~ompl~menting All,ed land Power,
d. Phase: Doctrine'
e. Functions: All . .
FOR THE COMMANDER:
I Incl /S/ A. J. DOMBHOWSKI

as A. J. DOMBHOWSKI
lTC, GS
Adjutant General
DISTRIBUTION:
E
17-Apr..2009
This document has
been declassified lAW A- 1-4
Army letter ~ated March' 5, 2009
. REFERENCES
,. Proposed Department of Defense Di~ective: DOD Program for Captured .

. and .Deta; ned Personn~ 1 (DOD PW P..rogram). . .
2. Draft AK 600-75, tU) Personnel - General, Captured'or Detained
United States ArmY Personnel Administration, R~turn, and Processing.
3. letter, USACDC, ~ 1969, subject: USACDC Proponency for Doctrine
Per~aining to·Captured·.US Mil1tary Personnel. . .
4. Code of Conduct (IAformation and Guidance);
5 •. Geneva Conventions 1929' arfd 1.949 pertain~ng to Prisoners of·War.
6. UnHed States Department·of Defense Report·on Implementatton and
9isseminatl0n o·f the Geneva· Convention of 1949. .
7~ ArmY Training Pr~gram lATP} 21-114.
~ .... '
8. AR350-225, 24 April 1969, Survival, Evas~on, and Escape Training.··
.9. USM~CV Intelligence Bulletin, 1 May ·1969. .5;
10. Fl,eet Intelligence Center, Pacific. SurviVal, Evasion, ReSistance,

Escape' (SERE) . News letters.
11 • .OOE> Directive 1000.1, 31 December 1964, Issuance of Identity Cards
. Required by t~e Geneva Convention.
',1
12. DOD Directive 51U5.18, 25 August 1959, Department of Defense Com-:

mittee Management'Program.
13. DUD Birectlve SI05.l1, 1 August 1961, Defense Intelligence Agency.
14. DOD Directive 5230.7, 25 June 1965, Censorship Planning.
!
15. OeD Instruction 1~00.9, 6 April 1967, Casualty Procedures for Military
Personnel. .
16. Deputy Secretary of Defe~~.~Me~ndum, 8 June 1~68, Policy for Pro-
c~sing of. Returned US Prisone~! of War and Other Detained Military Per-
sonnel.
17-Apr..2009
This document has· .
.~

Inc1 1 A-I-S EO 12958, as .amended,_ per
2009
17. Deputy Secretary of Defense Memor.andum, 30 November 1968, Policy and
Processing of Returned US Prisoners of War and Other Detained Military
Personnel. '
18. Deputy Secretary of,Defense Memorandum, 18 January 1969, Space Aval1~'
able Travel for Wives and Dependent Children of Missing-in-Action and
Captured Persannel.
19. Deputy Secretary of Defense Memorandum, 18 January 1969, Policy for
P,rocessing of Returned US Prisoners of War and Other Detained Military
Personnel.
20. Assistant Secretary of Defense (International Security Affairs)
Memorandum, 3J October 1967, Medlcal/Psychological Analysis of Films,
Photographs, and Tape Recordings of Captured American Servicemen.
21. Assistant,Secretary of Defense (Manpower and Reserve A,ffairs), Memo-
randum. 3 August ,1966. Dossiers for Personnel Missing-in-Attion and '
Captured.
22. Assistant Secretary of Defense tManpower and Reserve Affa'irs) Memo-
randum, 14 March 19b7, Prisoners of War in Southeast.Asia.
17..Apr.. 2009
This document has
been declassified lAW A-I-6
AN.NEX 'II
(U) .CHANGE TO STUDY PLAN
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
. HEADQUARTERS
UNITED STATES ARMY COMBAT DEVELUPMENTS COMMAND
Fort!Belvoir. Virg1n1a Z2060
CDCCD-S' .
SUBJECT: Captured/Detained US Military Personnel
Commanding-Officer
US Army Combat Developments Command
Instl.tute of Strategic and Stability Operations
Fort-Bragg •. North Carolina 28307
1. Keference: Letter, HQ USACDC, dated 16 Feb 70. subject as above

(Incl 1 ) . ( .
2. Paragraph 2b of· letter referenced above is c~anged to read:
"Addition of the Viet Cong as a cOl')sideratl0n for specific attention
regarding treatment of· captured/detalned US ml1itary personnel. It •
FOR-THE CoMMANDER:
, Inc' lSI J •• T. SCRUGGS

as J. t. SCRUGGS
Major. AGC
Asst AG
17-Apr-2009
This document has
Army letter dated March 5, 20'(;)9 - A-II:'"
ANNEX III" 'U N\.Jf' LJ\0~.r'tU
fl, <-:' r-
0 .• t 1.'- ~-.
~STUDY PLAN lU)
ST-U9Y PLAN
" ~ DOCTRINE FOR CAPTURED/DETAINED UNITED STATES MILITARY PERSONNEL
1. ~ PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVES
a. ,Oefi·nition of Problem. Exp loitation 9f'captured/detalned"US
,military personnel by unfriendly foreign states 1n,recent,years, during
both.peace and war. has dlctated tn~ need for a review'of present US
mllitary doctrlne to meet this situatio'n. Tnis explo,tatl0n of cap-
tured/detained personnel, often in violati.on of tne Geneva'Con.ventions,
has served the cause of unfriendly foreign powers. by"providins··'a mea'ns
by which political and other barga,ning pressure can be brought'to
bear on t.he US. Tl')e problem as it is recognized. involves the la'ck
of adequate interpretation of policy relative to training. and gu1pance
of the i~dividualconcerning his actions during the pre-internment,
internment, and post-', nternment phases, and wi th respect to other
acti'ans relative to tne individual taken by the ArR\Y during those
phases. In short, the problem entails the lnterpret,ation .of policy"
and the fonnulation of'doctrine and procedures wni cli wi 1,. best"support
national interests while concurrently insuring to tne,maximum extent
t~e rights and dignity of the individual during t~e following capture/
detenti on. ' , , '
b. Objective and Scope.
(1) Objective. Develop recommended new/r-evised US Army dectrine
and procedures relating to captured/detained US military;personnel~
(2) Scope.
(a) Collate, synthesize, an.d analyze"present US national
po 1i ci es and tne mi11.tary servi ces doctri ne and procedures relevant to
" capture(Vde~a1ned US mi,litary personnel. .' ' ..
(b) Collate,-synthes1ze, and analyze pertinent data, co~
c~rning the pollcies, processing, ~reatment, and methods of explo1tation
of captured/detai ned US mil'itary personne I by' unfri endly forei gn powers.
North Korea. North Vietnam and the Viet Cong will be specif1eally addressed
in this regard.
17-Apr-2009
This document has, .
.been declassified lAW
(c) Determine the adequacy of current doctrlne and pro-
cedures.
(d) Develop new/revised recommended doctrine and pro-
cedures, where required, in the fo11owing specific areas:
1. During training and prior to internment.
1. During internment.
3. During post-internment.
2. ~ IDENTIFICATION AND EXPLANATION OF STUDY ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIUNS
a. Assumption. U!:i milltary personnel wi 11 continue to face the threat
of capture/detention and possiDle exploitatlon during peacetime as. well as
during armed conflict.
b. Limi tat; ons.
(I) Th1S study wlll be conducted based on current US national
po Ii ci es, relating to captured/detained US mi 1; tary personnel, as pro-
vided by the Senior Army Staff Representatiye to the Department of Uefense
Prisoner of War Policy Committee (TPMG), only. Point of contact is
MAJ lazzaro, phone 11-35152.
\2) The study will not infringe upon US Air Force escape and
evasion doctrine responsibility. However, the study report may include
proposed Army input to change or modify this jOint doctrine.
3. ~ METHODOLOGY
a., Phase I. Data Collection. During this phase, data wi 11 be col-
lected to determinel) current us policies, doctrine, and procedures
pertaining to, ~aptured/detained US mllitary personnel and (l) the po11cjes,
.and practices of selected forelgn powerS relating to captured/detalned US
military personnel. Data'collection, for other than US pol1CY, will be
accomplished through:
(1) Literature search •.
(2) Debrieflng reports and interviews with repatriated US military
captives/detainees.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per A-III-2·.
U11I\J CLASS!FJED
./~'-~CON"18INTf~trU ~~
~ •
r r !~,~.~ -'-n
...... ....." , ,.J'~ ~.
j
., ',., ;l
:' - ;~ -'
(3,Interviews and consultations ~1th other s~]ected US military

and civilian' personnel. .
(4.) Input by US Army staff, agencies and organi·zatlons. ".
(5), Input by other military services.

b.. Phase II. Synthesis and Analysis •. Qata collected du,ring Phase I
will be synthes·1zed during Phase II (!lrior to' analysis into three components
.-
ro,
(1.) ,training and pre-internment; (2) internment; and (3·) ,post-i,nternment •.
Analysis will be accomplished on a systems basis, i.e., examining"each
component as part of a to~al system.
,(1) Eacn component will be analyzed in t~e lignt of.curr~nt US·
ps 11 ci es '. doctri ne, and procedures ~. a'nd the tnrea t. ' , ' .. '.
(2) , A systems analysis will then be conducted to detenmne the.
relationshlps which exi'st between cOqJonents and the 'degree of.imPact
between components.
(3) Trye va.lidity of-present doctrine and procedures 'will be
assesse.d andrequi rements for adjustments wi 11 be' detenni ned on a com-
ponent,ana systems basis. '
(4) Recammendati ons for. n,ew/rev; sed doctri ne . and procedures
wi1 I be Gevelope~ in coordination with otner military services.
c. Phase III. Production of Reports.,
, (1), A coordi.nation 'draft of the study wi 11 be 'prepared and
ready for coordination 9 months after commencement of the study. The
coordfnatien'draft will include a synopsis of the findings, conclusions,
an~ specific recommendations.
(2) Final draft of the,'study will be distributed 2 months' after

d'istribution of 'the 'coordination draft. . ,
(3) Initial manpower and materiel requirements (IMM.R) wi,.l1 be
submitted to include those.relevant.basis elements of information set
ferth in Section IV. page 39, paragraph f(1) of study, "Methodology
for th~ Col!lbat Developments Doctrinal 'Study Program," USACDClCASt' June
1969: . The final draft of the study will accompany the IMMR as a sup-
porting document~ ..
, 17 -Afilr-2009
This document ha~
EO 12958, as amended, per A-IU-3 '
Army letter dated March 5, 2009 ,U~JCL/\SSiFiED
----------------------------
4. (U) CONTRACT SUPPORT REQUIRED

No contractual support ;s requested. The urgency of initiating this
study precludes utilization of contractor support because of the lead
ti'me requ; red for approval.
5. :(V) ST~QY \,T.n1E .~qt~,Q~l~.. ',' ;, " . \ '
The programmed timetable for conducting this study is depicted in
Inclosure 1. The development is phased to permit input from a'1 agencies
and organization concerned with the subject.
6. (U) DETAILED BREAK[)(JlU OF HAtI-HOURS AND DOLLAR ALLOCATIml
:., ... ,' . a. r,1an-Hours: 24-man-months I effort expended ina peri od of 12
c~J~ndar months.
(1) 1550 Effort: 14.4 m/m
(a) Pre-internment: 5.0 m/m
(b) Internment: 3.0 m/rn
(c) Post-internment: 6.4 m/m
(2) Other Effort: 9.6 m/M
(a) CDC agencies: 3.3 m/m
(b) Other servi ces = 4.0 m/m
(c) Other organizations: 2.3 m/m
rmTE: 1550 effort is programmed for three project officers averaging
75 man-days per quarter (25 man-days per quarter per individual or approx-
. imate1y 8 1/3 man-days per month per i~dividual).
,.
J>
b. Dollar Allocation
(l) Contr~ctual Support: ~Ione
. ,
(2) TDY: $4,600.00

(3) In-house admin costs and add-ons: $50.00
17-Apr-2009
This document has
A-III-4
. EO 12958, as amended, per
. If Army letter dated March 5, 2009
(4) Other:
(a) Consultant, visit and fees:
(b) Other servi ces vis itors for
conferences: $725.00
TOTAL 1,475.00'
' .
.!' $6, 12S.rm ;
7. (U) DATA REQUIREMENTS ,
S As indicated in the Methedology, ,an e,xtens;ve ,literature search, i$
en-going to determine existing documentation relative to the study.
Datti requirements include such i,terns as:
a. Current US policies. doctrine, and procedures pertaining to '
captured/detained US military personnel.
b. Policies and practices of selected foreign powers relating to
captured/detained US military personnel.
8. (U) RESOURCE PLAN FOR PERFORHN~CE OF ENTIRE STUDY
a. ISSO Effert: Three :people employed to expend approximately 14.4
man-months and one social scientist and an operations research analyst
,to aid and work with study project officers.
b. Other CDC Effort: At the request of ISSO, other CDC organizations
wil; previae information required for the development of the s~udY. '
c. Other Ser·vi ces Effort: Other servi ces wil', be reqiJested'to pro-
,vide pertinent information in regard to present activities and programmed
plans regarding captured/detained military personnel •
. d. Other Supeort: Other organizations, not listed above, will be
requested te provlde information required for full development of the
study. Previous research or studies in this area plus the experience
of ot~er social scientists may'provide valuable data.
9. ~ COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF SUPPORT REQUIRED FOR THE STUDY EFFORT
FROt~ USACDC 'rum NON-USACDC ELEMENTS
a. Support will be requested as follows:
(1) With other CDC elements - Nermal requests 'for input, docu-
mentation and/or cGOrdin~tion through established channels~
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW A-IU-5
EO 12958, as amended, per ,
Army letter da~ed March 5, 2009
UNC'L...JA,(-> (':
•
, J
",..
! '; 1
l '. f. , : ; l
... t
)
ro
~
l...
(Z) With nan-CDC organizations - Requests for replies to specific

EEA and information through CDC Headquarters. In the case of other ser-
vices represented at the US A~ John F. Kennedy Center for Military
Assistance, initial contact will be made through their liaison personnel.
b. Appropriate CDC organizations, including-HQ CDC, and the Office
of the Prevost t~arshal General, OA, will be requested,to fumish repre-
sentatives to participate in in-process reviews to be held at times
keyed to the progress of the study.
c. Discussion Qr requests conceming the obtaining of policy, as
opposed to doctri ne or procedures, \'Ii 11 bli! di rected through Hf1 USACnC
to the Office of the' Provost Marshal General, DA, only.
d. Contact with other than DOD agencies and organizations will be
approved, on an individual basis, by HQ USACDC in coordination with
HQ DA (TPt-1G).
10. (U) STUDY OUTLItIE
Study outline is attached as Inclosure 2'.
\
. 11. (U) CORRELATION

This action is designated as USACDC Action Control Number 15596
and supports the follewing: ,
a. ArmY Combat Developments Program: Army-75.
b. Study, IIAr'II\Y-75", USACDC Action Control tlunber 3189.
c. ArIY\Y Tasks: 1 High-Intensity Conflict.
2 'tHd-Intensity Conflict.
3 Low-Intensity ,Conflict, Type I.
,4 Low-IntenSity Conflict, Type II.
7 Complementing Allied'Land Power.
'0
d. Phase: Doctrine.
e. Functions:
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW A-III-6
. EO 12958, as ame~ded, per
Arrny letter dated March 5, 2009
• GOtIIIDI'"T'AI-
(1) Intel'i gence.
(2) f10bil ity.
(3) Firepower.
(4) Command, Control and Communications.
(5) Service Support.
2 Incls
a. Study Time Schedule and Flow Chart
b. Stu~ Outline
17-Apr-2009
This document has
A-III-7
.
., ~ 17-Ap r..2009 ('I
This document has
INCLOSURE A. Army letter dated March 5, 2009
CAPTURED I DETAINED US MILITARY PERSONNEL
STUDY TIME SCHEDULE
fl .. _1tt \II. 1 _til

I " . z"",*thf "<tlHMt1I.l 1III.4111f1art;UII
I
I
I:
I
I
I
Ii'
i
.'
I;'
0-
..
, ,......,. M.' ....... 1I.1MftCIK . . . . tlllftUiol ". t ....."" ".\0 .....
4.':
Inclosure b
STUDY OUTLINE* (U)
Purpose.
Scope.
'! Object; ves.
Assumptions.
Limitations, Constraints.
Background.
Current Responsibilities, Policies, and Procedures.

Uationa1.
Executive •.
Governmenta 1 Agenci es.
000 Level.
Servi ces (Anny, tlavy, AF).
Unfriendly States.
North Korea.
North Vietnam.
Viet Congo
Current Oectrine.
Army.
* This outline is not intended to indicate final form of the report. but
only to indicate major areas of consideration and general sequence of the
study.
17..Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW A-III-b-l
. ------:-------------
----;---:-.
Gaps, Conflicts, Inconsistenciesc

Requi ~ments.
Joint.
Gaps, Conflicts, Inconsist~ncies.
Req ui rements.
Navy.
Air Force.
Development of Army Doctrine by Phase.

Prior to .Internment.
Personal Aspects.
Pretraining (Reception).
Physiological and Psychological •
. Indi vi dua 1 t - Advanced rnd; v; dua 1- and Un; t Trai ni n9.
Information and Education.
Code of'Conducto
Geneva Convention.
Character. Gui danCe.
-Survival. Evasion~ and Escape.
Esprit de Corps.
Condi ti on1'n9.
School s. •
Family' ConSiderations. '
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958,'a$ amended, per A-III-b-2-
During Internment.
Confl; ct.
Personal Behavior.
Inte 11 i gence.
Escape.
Tactical RecQvery.
Non-ConfH ct.
Family Considerations.
Post Internment.
Evacuation and Handling.
Debriefing and Investigation.
Medical Treatment.
Intelligence and Security.
Informati on.
Legal.
Special Considerations.
Identi fi catic:m of Defectors.
Nature of Return.
Escapee (or Evadee).
Recoveree.
".' Re-leasee.
Rehabil i tation.
Reassignment or Discharge.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW A-III-b-3
Army letter dated' March 5, 2009
Family Considerations.
Development of Joint- Doctrine.

Roles and Responsibilities.
Intell i gence. -
Information.
Training.
Coordinat1on with Other Agencies.
Recovery.
Evacuation and Handling.
lega 1.
Rehabilitation.
Fami1y Considerations.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified·IAW A-III-b-4
APPENDIX B
"ESSENTIAL ELEt,1ENTS OF AtMLYSIS
1. GENERAL. Listed below a~ the essential elements of analysis (EEA)
which are the pri'mary questions posed prior to the initiation of the
study effort. The ·answers to the EEA are as brief and succinct,as
'P0SS ib 1e and reference is made to the ~mai n part of the study where a
mare therough explanation or derivation may be found.
"
0:.. ESSENTIAL ELEr~ENTS OF ANALYSIS:
a. Communist Prisoner of War r,1anagement Principles:
(l) WHAT ARE THE PRINCIPAL COt~t~UtIiST TECHflIQUES USED IN HArWLItIG
PRISONERS OF ~IAR? (See Secti on II, Chapter 2)
(a) The 'ColTlJlunist prisoner of \'/ar management system is
desi gned to obtain maximum exp1oita'tion of the pri soner of war, and,
whenever possib1e,reorient ideologically the individual captive. These
goals are sought through the efficien.t' and effective use of resources~
both physical facilities and skilled personnel, and by application of
speci fi c techni que's.
(b) The most commonly used techniques are those of
intimidation, interrogation. isolation, segregation. psychological and
physical stress. and indoctrination. By the calculated application of
these 'techniques., the Conrnunists create an environment which supports the
mental-conditioning process (attitude). to eliminate resistance tendencies
on the part of the prisoner and to facilitate exploitation.
(2) WHAT SPECIFIC PURPOSE(S} DOES EACH TECHtlIQUE PUI::FILL?
(See Section II. Chapter 2) .
./
(a) In:timi dation. Intimi dati on is used to' degrade psy-

cho1a!!jically the indivi:dua1 P~J to the point where he no longer resists the
demands 0f.his captor. Immediately upon capture and for the duration of
his internment. the threat of death intimidates the PW. The vocalization
of' this threat,by his Communist captors serves to heighten his fears
and makes him dependent upon the captor for his very existence. In
addition, the PW recognizes that any act considered to be arrogant or
uncooperative could result in reduced rations or denial of medical help.
Along with prom0ting the fear of death and the withholding of privileges
or necessities. it is not uncommon that the Communists' threaten the p~~
17-Apr-2009
This document has
B-1
Army letter dated March 5, 2009 '
with detention beyond the cessatjen af, the current hostilities.
Nonnal1y. ,the development of a IIprogres·s'lve" attitude is held out ,as the
key for repatriati on. "In all ca~~s and wh~tever the threat, the a1m
of intimidation is ~U compliance' with the captor's de.sires.
. ,(b): Interrogation,•. 'Th.e Communists use, interrogation to .
assess the. exp]oitation'value of the ,PW ..and to obtain initial dial,ogue
bet\lleen ,captor and. captured~ l"hen assessing. the pri soner for exploita-
tion values interrogation also serves as a screening process. The .
relative resistance displayed by the pri soner is we; ghed against those
measures deemed necessary to gain his compliance. Prisoners are rapidly
segregated inta "reactionaries" (hard-li ne resisters) and "progressives"
(individuals who are or who appear to be receptive to indoctrination
efforts). This permits the Communist to identify those PW's with whom
they. have the best chance to succeed. , Establishing an initial dialogue
is a first step toward the 'responsive pattern desired in the exploi~ation
process. The "g; ve and take" di scussion s albeit one-sided, prov; des the
skilled interrogator tne opportunity to undermine th~ ideals of the
prisoner, and at th'e same, time" accustoms the prisoner to responding
to ideas provi ded him. . " ,, '
(c) IsQiation. Communists use' isolation primarily for·dis-
ciplinary p'urposes and fQr the promotion 'of a particular response or .
action from the PW. By removing the prisoner from the outside stimuli
from which ,he would normally derive support (e.g., his fellow prisoners,
famil i ar objects,s communi cati.on s established routine) t the PH becomes
totally dependent upon his ~~mmupist ·captors. Th~ PW who refuses to,
converse With his interrogator/indoctrinator is quite likely to experi'ence
a long period of isolation. Upon re1~ase from'weeks or,months'of'
isolation, the PW 1s norm~11y eager to talk,to someDne--even if that
someone is the enemy interrOgator.' Isolation also provides an environ-
ment in which the PW can onJy look inward; and his doubts, fears, and
guilt contfnue to groW. Playfng on these erootions, the Communists seek
to destroy confi dence and ,i nsti 11 dependency. '
(d) Application.tif PsyChological and' Physical Stress.
The,Co~unist 'application' of "rewards or ,punishments 1s often done for no
explicable reason. The principle beh1n9 ~his seemingly haphazard
technique is that it keeps the PW off-balance. He never knows whether
he will receive extra. rations s' his standard rations, or no rations at "
all. He is severely p,u'ni.sh,ed for slight offenses.and leniently ~reated
for .more serious ,ac;ts. In t~e stri ctly controlled atmosphere of intern..
ment.
. su,ch treatment frustrates and disori ents the. p~t. He becomes. '
17-Apr-2009
This document has
B-2
EO 12958; as amended, per
'f
wary of every act, not only of his own making but also those of his
fellow PW's. Resentment is not unusual when a PW feels he is being
punished for another.PW's act(s). Often mass reward and punishment is
used as an instrument for disrupting prisoner loyalties and reducing col-
lective resistance. (See Se~regation below)
(e) Segregation. It is normal for Communists to separate
officers, NCO's, and enliste·d personnel if sufficient facilities exist.
Two specific purposes are served: the first is to destroy the USPW
command structure, thus reducing collective resistance; and the second
;s to form homogeneous b10cks of "students" at whom a special brand of
indoctrinal material 'can ae aimed. It is worth noting,.as stated in
Interrogation above, that hard-line resisters are normally separated from
the other prisoners so that their example of resistance will not ad-
versely affect the indoctrination of the others. This too, is part
of the segregation policy.
(f) Indoctrination. Indoctrination is a technique
which has been deve10ped and refined by the Communists. It 1s a
program of instruction directed toward·altering the pre-capture values
of the prisoner. The indoctrination effort seeks to instill within
the PW an understanding of the Communist cause and, if possible, gain
his sympathy for, or convert him to, the Communist ideology. From the
moment of capture t9 the time for' release, the PW is subjected to both
overt and covert efforts to realign his personal and nationalistic
ideals. The only information (current events, political, military, etc.)
he receives is that which his captors feel will enhance his "progress. 1t
The eroding effect upon his values wo.rks toward inducing the P\~ to
participate in compromising propaganda exercises. The indoctrination
effort has succeeded when the PW,;s ready for exploitation.
(3) IN THE TREATMENT OF PRISONERS OF WAR, WHAT DIFFERENCE
EXISTS, IF ANY, BETWEEN COIt·1UNIST METHODS AND/OR OBJECTIVES AND THOSE
OF QTHER COUNTRIES? (See Section I, Chapter 2)
, A si~nif1cant difference in treatment of prisoners of war exists
because of the difference in the relative value placed upon the PW
himself by the respective detaining powers. In the case of a non-
Communist nation who is a belligerent to an armed c(:mflict, the value
of the prisoner of war. outside of any immediate tactical information
'''i he mi ght shul ge, l1es solely in the fact ,that he represents one less
soldier the opposition has under arms. He has. in effect. been removed
from the conflict. The Communists, on the other hand, consider the PW
to be a valuable prize to be exploited and ~sed to support their
17-Apr-2009
This document has B-3
=-= ....
military/political/economic goals. They expend considerably more

effort than other detai ni ng powers in attempt; ng to conditi on the P\~.
to accept their doc~rinal ·material. Even partial acceDtance alters the
PUIS values and beliefs, 'thus making him more amenable to exploitation •
. Although most techniques' used' by 'the Communists in their treatment of
prisoners are commonly used in'penal institutions, there is ah/ays a
unique twist which supports the indoctrination/exploitation effort.
A PW of.a non-CoJTJl1uni st state is primal"; ly concerned wi th boredom
and survival; the PH of a Comniunist state must be concerned 'with
resisting a relentless re-education campaign from which there is no
rel.ief. - .
(4) ~IHAT RESISTANCE TECHNIQUES, IF ANY it WILL LESSEtl THE EFFECTS

OF ItITERNf-'ENT UNDER Cor-1t~UNIST r1ANA~Er~ENT?' (See Appendi x H)
(a) Adherence to the concepts set forth in the Code of
Conduct represents the best resistance to Communist management. principles.
Further techniques for resistance are provided' in the paragraphs below.
(b) Specific techniques ·for foiling interrogation/
indoctrination a r e : ' . '
. 1. Remain silen~ to the utmost of one's ability,
except for providing name, rank., service number, and date of birth.
'.~~. Claim ;gnorancea
1. Portray stupidity.
4. Provi'de long, drawn out answers wh~ch buy time.
i. Answer questio~s with questions.
(c) Specific'technique.s for fOiling segregation are:
1. Establish and respect the chain of command
re.gf:l,rdless· of th~..rank of-the' "sen; or. II
2. Establisn communication whenever possible-with
oth'er.. groups th rou'gh s i gna1s '01" mes!;~ge drops. .
1. Discuss .passive resistance techniques with fello~/'
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW B-4
Army-letter dated March 5, 2009
i. Respect and maintain loyalty to fellow PW's and
CDuntry.
(d) Specific'techniques fsr enduring isolation:
1. Estab1isn and maintain a daily schedule of mental
gymnastics sf at least one-hour duration.
~. Establish and maintain a daily schedule of proper
exercise.
3. Prepare to experience hallucinations and not fear
<"; them inasmucn as tney are not harmful and the effect is totally reversible
upon release.
4. ,Remain loyal to fellow PW's and country.
-'5. Establish, if PQssible, communication thraugh hand
. 'signals, knQcking codes, or message drop. .
(e) Specific techni~ues for enduring physical debasement:
1. Establish and respect the chain of cOl1lTland •.
£. .Establish and maintain a daily regimen of proper'
ex~rcise.
3.. Eat everything the captor provides and supplement

whenever p,ossible:-
.1.., Maintain good personal hygiene •
.§.;. r1ai ntai n the proper sani tat; on in the i ntemment
area..
-L.
6.. Es tab 11 sh communi cati on wi th fe 11 ow PW' s.
Keep the mind active 'by planning escapes and
other mental gymnastics.
(f) As implied in the Cade, the best resistance techniques
for all the above· i~ an intangible wnich must be ingrained in the
soldi.er even befare he is inducted into the Anny; i.e., faith--faith in
himself, faith in his fellow PW, and faith in his country.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW B-S
Army 'Ietter dated March 5, 2009
. ~
b..,. . ,National Poli,cy:
, (1 ) \JHAT ARE THE PRIflCIPAL ELEMENTS OF US UATIONAL POLICY As IT
PERTAItIS TO CAPTURED/DETAIrIED ,US MILITARY PERSONNEL? (See Sect~on II,
Chapter 3) There are three principal elements of US national policy:
Ca) To persuade hostile nations detaining US per.sonn~l ,to
provide t~atment and protection in accordance with the provisions of
intemational Jaw and custom, p'articularly the 1949 Geneva Conventi'on
Relative to the' Treatment of Prisoners of War. This is accomplished
primarily by the pr-inciple of reciprocity; that is, providing prisoners
of war of hostile nations \,/ith the kind of treatment and protection the
United"States desjres for:USP\J"s in en~my hands.
(b) 'To penni t pri soners of war, during or after the cesssa-
tion of hostiliti.es, to elect whether or, not they desire to be returned ,
to their own country. Although the principle of voluntary or nonforcible
repatriation is not a matter ,of wri~ten international, or even national,
agreement, the ~nited States established the pr.ecedent follo~'ling the'
Korean L'Jar and has abided by the concept in tlie current hostilities in
Southeast As; a., ' ,
(c) To improve tbe ability of the US serviceman to fight
the enemy, avoid capture, and, if captured, to resist the enemy while
awaiting an'. opportunity
.' .
to-escape.,
.
(2) ~'HAT PROMINENT PRINCIPLE{S) OF INTER~IATIONAL LAW AFFECTS'
US r~ATIONAL POLICY IN THE AREA OF CAPTUREO/OETAHlEO US r'lILlTARY
PERSmmEl? (See Section III, Chapter 3)
(a) The Geneva Convention,Re1ative'to the Treatment of
Prisoners of War (GPW) 'is 'the fundamental legal document which guides
US national po1icy~ .This convention, one of four which as a composite
make up t~e Geneva Conventions, of 1949~ sets forth international law
in the' following ,~,~as:
1. Definition of a prisoner of war.
, '
- , 2'. Categori~s of captured civilian personnel enti.t1ed

to the protect; on O'f the GP\J. '
1. ,R; ghts of the PlI.
17-Apr-2009 .
This documen~ has
':', .
!,. Functiens of' the"pretect1 ng' power. -
Red Cross. ...fie . Functions 9f the Intematienal CMmittee of the

.~" ~ -
...... ~ "'. .... ..
. (b) Asecand series"of conventiens te which the United

States is a signatery and'whtch'thus'have an influence on US'nat1anal
'. 'policy teward·PW's are'the Hague Conventions,af 1907. The Hague Con-
vention Ne. IV addresses the treatment of PW and establishes guidelines
in the,fali'owing areas:
1.' Responsibilities 9f the detaining pawer.
!. 'Utilizatian af PW's as a labor force •
. "1." Estab.Hshment of pw' inftimnati on center.
i. Paro1e/escape/neutra1 internment.
E.. Treatment- 'Of'; 5 1ck and -wounded.
~.' ~rQh1~itions en-killing Dr wounding prisoners of war.
'L., '. Repatrf athn '~f prisoners af war.
c. 'Pre-internment-'Phasa-:'" " ., .
(1) WHAT DOCTRINE is REQUIRED Ta ASSIST THE US SOLDIER TO SURVIVE
INTERN~NT AS A PRISONER 'OF'WAR?' . (See Section" IV and V,,· Chapter' 2)
The primar,y. doctrine required is that'which'wi1l establish and maintain
the ability of the soldier' to' cope'with -the physically demanding and
mentally debilitati'ng effects"of"the captive environment. It must
prevHle guidance' on' cendutt'~' estape~'·evasioni··and survival both while
evading and, e.qual.1y imporuntlY',whi1e interned •. DrJctrinal literature
nu.st·acquaint .the--~S sGldier" wtth· 'the princ1ples and' techniques'''Whi ch ,
, .. ' ! ,
>- ~'
.....
I
-'~"''' nr:I,ght'J;)~ "~i:re~ted at,him" bS"'a·'~apt~n:~~ .. ~n' J:f:I1~,:w1·th this,., there must b;e .
",' ~ . dCDctrinal "gui dance .em the' best"means 'to 'ceuil'te'", 'or' endure these technl~ues.
If 'accamp1ished, the soldier wauld have a better indicatian Qf what ta
antici pate and hew ta surYi.ve' when thrust into·'the prisGner af war
role •. In 'essence. a callectian- of dG<;trina1 guidelines 1s required which
w1.1l j)remt!lte the ability ta survive the mentally and physically hestile
env1rennent of a "risen call1f).. Such guidelines must be expressed in
tenJIS af what the captive can..expe.ct..
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per "
...~
. '.
{2} WHAT IS THE EXISTUIG DOCTRItlE FOR ASSISTING TUE US SOlnIr.~
TO SURVIVE IUTERNf1ENT AS A PRISONER OF'lIAR? (See Chapter 4)
, , ' ( a ) Existing doctrine as expressed in current Department of
the Amy Field Hanua'ls addresses the fol10\,/ing broad areas:
1. ,Survival (FW21':'76).
~. Escape (H1 21·76). '
1. 'Evasion (FH 21-76).

, '
!. Code of Conduct (n1 21-76, Ft1 21-13, Ff 4 21-75).
i. Geneva and Hague Conventions {OA Pam 27-1}.

~. Field'Sanitation (FM 21-10).
L. Personal Hygiene (FM 21-10).
§.. Physical Conditioning (Ff1 21-20).
2.. First Aid (m 21-1l).
, (b) Much of the doctrine presented in the above areas is
directed t~lard existing 1n the combat situation while under friendly
contro1. Hovlever. many of the points covered are equally applicable to
the internment envirOn/rent.
(3) '~lHAT ELEt1EflTS OF REQUIRED DOCTRIiIE ARE ,NOT CURRENTLY SATISFIED?
(See para 4, Section I.. and para' 5, Section' II, Chapter 4)
(a) The princ1pa1 drawback 'of current doctrine is its -'
excess,ively general nature. Further, insofar as the internment environ-,
ment is concerned, most of the doctrine presented concerns itsel f wi til
the large ~Sorld War II prisoner of war compound situation and fails to
addre~s the low prisoner population $ituations such as occur~d with
the Pueblo crew and the current conflict:'ir.. Southeast Asia.
(b) Existing doctrine includes only brief descriptions of. ,
methods and techniques of interrogation', indoctrination and exploita't:ion~
but fails enti rely to provi de positi've'means of resisting them. There
is no' adequate qoctrine on the, maintenance of physical or menta) heal~h "
in the prison camp, nor is there realistic guidance for the PIPs conduct.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
'been declassified lAW
EO 12958, as amended, per B~8
(c) In summary', 'current Arl1lY doctri ne does not prov; de
sufficient guidance to the US soldier'on'what he can' expect from his
captors, what he can do to assist his own survival, and what is expected
af him insofar as' his' own conduct while"a' prisoner of war is concerned.
(4) WHAT PROGRAMS EXIST IN THE OTHER SERVICES TO ASSIST
THEIR MEI~BERS W SURVIVING INTERNt'£NT AS A PRISONER OF WAR? (See Annex I,
Appendix K) . ', , '
(a) The Air Force and the Navy maintain established resist-
ance training prngrams' for' their personnel.'" These programs address the
enti re spectrum of the prisoner of war"environment and existence. In
both Services, the depth of resistance training varies actarding to
duty assignment and the "risk of capture'" potential of the students.
(b) For personnel 'wi th a high "risk of capture" potential,
especi ally ai r crewmen, both the Ai r Force and the Navy conduct
intensive resistance training programs at Survival, Evasion, Resistance,
and Escape (SERE) schools. SERE trainfng'programs at these facilities
provide training in' the Code of Conduct, primitive medicine, evasion
and escape, and the techniques and countermeasures of interrogation
and indoctrination. The principles taught in the classroom are tested
in Uresistance training laboratories" which are mock internment compounds
complete with isolation cells, interrogation rooms, and aggressor cadre.
The durati on of' the Uavy pro'QY'am is 5 1/2 days, while the Ai r Force
program lasts 2 weeks.
(c) The Marine Corps training' closely resembles that of the
US Army. The t~ar1nes have no specific co,urse in resistance, but cover
the subject as a part of their Code of Conduct training.
, (d) For comparison, although' not a sister Service per (e'
the resistance program conducted by'the Central Intelligence Agency IA)
lasts but 6 hours. As a medium, the CIA'program utilizes exclusively
a film series in which an acknowledged expert describes the incidents
and effects of captivity and demonstrates methods of resistance.
d. Inteml1l!nt Phase:
(1) WHAT PROGRAnS ARE REQUIRED TO ASSIST THE NEXT OF KIN DURING
A-SPONSOR'S PERIOD OF IrlTERtmENT AS A PRISONER OF ~IAR? (See Section It
Chapter 5) ,
(a) There are three major programs required to assist the
next of kin (NOK) once a sponsor falls into a prisoner of war status.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
The first and most obvious is that of notifying the UOK of the sponsor's
status.' Such _a program must',be geared'to account for the psychological
shock such news will cause to th~ NOK. The second program involves
the preparation and assignment of a Family Services and Assi~tance '
Officer (FSAO) and the delineation of his duties. A selected member of
the A~ must be made available to act as an efficient and sensitive
liaison between the Army and the missing or captured sponsor's family.
, The final pragram is actually a series of programs designed to alleviate
the personal problems which commonly occur and with which the NOK of
a PW must cope. These p,rograms must assist the NOK in such matters as
finance. medicine, transportation, ~ousing, education, and legal
assi stance.
, (b) The latter programs are required inasmuch as the, '
sponsor is no longer capable of providing the guidance arid assistance
he normaJly gives. The FSAO must be knowledgeable in these programs and
stand ready to assist the rlaK to take full' advantage of them:
" ,
,(2) WHAT PROGIWlS CURRENTLY EXIST TO ASSIST THE flEXT OF Kit!

DURING A SPONSOR'S PERIOD Of ltlTERNr1ENT AS A PRISotlER OF WAR? (See
Secti on I, Chapter 5)
(a) 'AriJ1y po1i,!=Y broadly, 'and, for the most par:t, adequately,
addresses the area of concern fndicated in subparagraph en above. A
very brief synopsis of. tne programs currently operati ve is provi ded in
s\Jbsequent p a r a g r a p h s . ' ,
(b) Uotification. Notification is accomplished as soon

as,possible through,a personal visit by an active duty service member of
a rank'hi gher than or equal, to '!;hat of th~ tlIA/PH sponsor.
(c) Family Assistance. A Family Services and Assistance
Officer (FS,AO) is apPointed to personally advise and assist the NOK of
the tUA/PW servi ce' inerrtler. The FSAO must be of a rank hi gher than or '
equal 'to that of the seryice menDer and must have a retention period
to'serve in the FSAO' capacity of at least 12 months.
(d) Monetary Assistance. Excess pay and allowances not
already designated in allotment to flOK may be placed in the Uniformed
Services Savings Deposit to'dr~ 10 percent per annum; amount deposited
may exceed authorized 1fmitof $10,000.
" (e) r.fedica1 Assistance. Dependent;s authorized hospital-'

ization, outpatient
:
treatment and services under the Uniformed Service~
~,
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW B~ 10'
Health Benefits program. If NOK lives beyond commuting distance to a
military medical facility, civilian facilities may be used under the
Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAt~US).
(f) Housing ~sistance. Th~ NOK of a MIA/PW sponsor is
entitled to live in government owned er leased facilities during the
period the sponsor remains in that status.
(g) Education Assistance. There are several programs
desi gned to assist the adult and children f'lOK to obtain both ,hi gh school
and college level educations.'
(h) Transportation Assistance. Within 1 year of notifi-
catien. the flOK of a MIA/PW sponsor may. at government expense. move to
an area of her(h1s) choice. There are also provisions to permit such
NOK to travel aboard military air transportation on a space available
basis within CONUS for humanitarian reasons.
(1) legal Assistance. The tICK may request and receive
legal assistance from the closest JAG activity. '
(j) '. Personal Information Assistance. The Adjutant'Genera1
provides person41 nonthly newsletters to the tlOK of MIA/PW personnel
whtch contain perti nent reports and comments on tUA/PW status and
related activities.
(3). WHAT ELEMENTS OF REQUIRED PROGRAMS ARE NOT CURRENTLY
SATISFIED BY EXI'STING PROGRAr«i? (See Appendix I)
(a) The currerit programs within Department of the A~ to
assist the' next of kin of r~Il\lp", personnel satisfy all reqUirements.
The failures noted are more in execution of the pregrams as opposed to
lack of programs .themselves.
(b) Specific requirements for the selection and composition
'of the notification personnel are at the discretion of the installation
commander and guidance to those personnel varies from post to post.
Further. the general guidance provided by A~ Regulation 600-10 fails
to adequately address the psychological and·physiological effects of
nott ft cati on upon the flOK.
. (c) Speci fic requirements for the selection of the Family
Services and Assistance Officer (FSAO) are also left to the discretion
of the installation commander, as are his instructions for carrying out
17-Apr-200~
This document has
been declassified lAW 8-11
Army letter dated March 5! 2009
his duties. From the standpoint of the rIOK, there is no sing1e source
docullE'nt 'or collecti.em 'of docurrents which list the specific services
avail able to the r~OK.
(d),- Finally, there is an apparent absence of emphasis on
informing the soldier of the nature of the services available to the
next of kin should he becorre missing or captured.
(4) WHAT P.ROGRAMS EXIST IN THE OTHER SERVICES TO ASSIST THE
NE'XT OF KIN DURING A SPOtISOR'S PERIOD OF INTERNt~ENT? (See Annex II,
Appendix K)
, (a) Th,e fundamental objectives of the casualty programs of
the other Servi ces are cOll111on: to prov; de prompt and appropri ate ,
notifi'cation and to offer complete assistance to the next of kin. There
are, however, structural differences in the various pro~rams delineated
by the 'Navy, the 11ari ne 'Corps, and the Ai r Force. '
(b) The .notific'ation procedures of the Navy program closely
parallel those ()f the Army casualty program •. The t~avy Casualty
Assistance Calls Program (CACP) requfres' that an officer be designated
to assist the' primary .next of k1n. The Uavy counterpart to the Army
Family Services and Assistance Officer {FSAO} is the Casualty Assistance
Calls Officer (CACO). Services and benefits available to'next of kin
are similar to those available to the next of kin of ArmY personnel
(financial matters~ travel, housing, etC'.). In addition, the Navy
publishes a manual for the next of kin,"tnA/PW Family Information,lI
which lists and describes all available'benefits and serviceso
,(c) The t4ari'ne Corps casu'alty' program resembles that of
the r~avy. t~arine Corps policies and methods',vary some\tlhat from those
of the other Services because of limitations in personnel and facilities.
Thus, for example, casualty assistance 'cans are conducted on a periodic
basis (quarterly), rather, than with the frequency manifested by the
other Services. The benefits and services provided, however, are
practically i~ntical to thos~ offered to next of kin by the Navy.
(d) The Air force ,provides the most sophisticated casualty
program among the Se·rvi ces. While not; fi cati on procedures and servi ces
offered the next of kin do not differ from those of the other Services,
the techniques of application and administration are substantially more
efficient. There is a!1 Air ~orce pamphlet', "Benefits for Dependents
and Survivors of ,Air Force Casualties," which .delineates and describes
the services offered next of kin. The Air Force provides a specific
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amen~ed, per . B-12
.,
Specialty Code (corresponding to an AnT\Y f~OS) directly related to family
assistance. As a consequence, the casualty officer is a specialist with
only one job--assisttng a dependent or a next of kin. In addition, the
Air Force has created an organization to handle all family problems
and provide advice to next of kin. This organization is kn~ln as the
Family Service Cente·r. The Air Force Casualty Division is the principal
organizati on responsible for pri soner of war matters. As a servi ce
to next of kin, the Casualty Division evaluates and distributes to the
next'of kin reports, messages, letters, and eyewitness accounts as
they are received.
8. Postinternment Phase.
(1) WHAT DOCTRINE/POLICY EXISTS FOR RECEIVHIG, DEBRIEFING, AND
PROCESSING RETURNED USPWS? (See Sections I and II. Chapter 6)
. (a) There is no current doctrine on receipt, debriefing,
and prsces.sing of returned USP\JI s. All poli cy gui dance in these areas
,is found in Army'Regulations (AR's) and Operation Plans (OPLANS).
(b) AR 190-25,. "Captured. t.1issing, or Detained US ArR\Y
Personnel: Administration, Return, and Processing t ll is the primary
source ,for policy and contains guidance for both in-theatre and CONUS
processing. It covers the following:
1. DA staff responsibilities.
~. In-theatre staff responsibilities.
,1.,' Evacuation and, medi cal processing instructions.
4. In- theatre and CONUS 1nte 11 i gence! co un ter-
intelligence debriefing gUfdance.
i., Investi gation for mi sconduct guidance.
i. Public information guidance.
L. Personnel actions instructions.
(c) COMUSMACV OPLAN J-190 (EGRESS-RECAP) is an in-theatre
Operatio~ P1an wn~ch prescribes procedures for in-theatre reception.
proces~ing. and evacuation of US prisoners of war and civilian detainees
who are returned to US control in South Vietnam. '
17-Apr-2009
This document has •
EO 12958, as amended, per B-13
· (d) US Art'I1)' Intelligence Command Prisoners of 'War Oeb'riefing
Plan (U) OPLAN 107-71 (EGRESS RECAP - ArmY) is a supplement to AR 190-25
for the CONUS debriefings and prescribes responsibilities and 'procedures'
for simultaneous debriefing of large scale return of US Army personnel
from Southeast Asia to COriUS. It is applicable only in the event of a
requirement to simultaneously debrief 11 ,or'more released/recovered
USP\I's. (10 or less are governed by AR 190-25 and USA Intelligence
Command Regulation 381-.100.) It contains guidance in the follO\,ling
area!> :
1. Ta's k organi za ti on.
1. Conduct of debriefing.
1. Preparation -for debriefing.
~. Narrative debriefing guide and list of desired
informat10n.
i.- Admi ni strati on and 1ogi s ti cs.
(2) WtiAT DOCTRINE/POLICY IS REQUIRED TO ADEQUATELY RECEIVE,
DEBRIEF. AND PROCESS RETURNED USPW'S? (See Appendix J)
, (a) The processing and screening of returned PW's must
strive 1;oward their fwll rehabilitation and adjustment as functioning.
const~u,ct1 ve ci ti zens.
(b) Appropriate policy must exist which will assure the

expeditious integration of repatriates back into society. There must,
however. be sufficient safeguards in the processing poliGY which will
permit the weeding out of possible enemy agents or, more importantly,
permit the identification of those individuals requiring physical or
psychiatric rehabilitation. The delicate balance between the needs
of the government and the needs of the individual must be identified
and maintained. '
(c) There must be appropr; ate pol; cy in ,the matter of
debriefing the returnee •. Every effort must be made -to safeguard the
returnee's legal rights. The policy established in this area must take
into account the hardships and duress, both phYSical and psychological
that ttie individual endured. ' , '. "
(d) Personal rights must also 'be considered in established
policy. The reunion with next of kin, the treatment as a so'ldier of
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per 11-14
the US A~~ appropriate scheduling such that the returnee has time to
reflect, etc., are areas which should be addressed. Guidance on
relations with the public press must be provided to the returnee.
(e) In summary, there must be adequate policy which
insures that the reception process of returnees is not a "dehumanizing"
expertence-andwhich assure.s that the individual's health and welfare is
the parameunt concern. . '.
(3) WHAT ELEMENTS OF REQUIRED DOCTRlUE/POLICY ARE riOT CURRENTLY
SATISFIED BY EXISTING DOCTRINE/POLICY? (See Appendix J)
(a) Army policy as prescribed in AR 190-25 suffers from
a lack of explicit guidance in regard to the welfare and morale of
returnees. The AR devotes only a single paragraph to this subject, and
it fails -to impart to subordinate commanders the critical priority which
DOD'clearly intends ,to be given to the welfare of returnees.
(b) ArmY policy on public release of information is inade-
quate. Both AR 190-25 and t1ACV OPLAN J-190 specify that returnees are
to be counseled by an information officer and an intelligence officer
on this aspect, but no specific guidance on what the counseling should
address is provlded. The only explicit public information guidance
in AR 190-25 consists of a single paragraph contained in Appendix A of
that regulation. '
(c) Debriefing guidance as currently provided by AR 190-25
and USAHlTC OPLAN 107-71 fails to provide specific procedures for
protecting the rights of the returnees to be presumed innocent where
there exists no prior evidence/accusations of misconduct. AR 381-130,
cited by OPLAN 107-71 as the basis for developing debriefing formats
and techniques, is clearly weighted 1n the direction of an investigation
of conduct rather than a search for intelligence information. Further,
the guidance in both OPLAN 107-71 and AR 190-25 on the special need to
assure that the individual's rights are protected is very sterile and lacks
the requisite emphasis. .
(4) WHAT PROGRAMS EXIST IN THE OTHER SERVICES 'FOR RECEIVING,
DEBRIEFING, AND PROCESSING RETURNED USPt~IS? (See Annex III t Appendix K)
(a) ,The other Services have developed detailed OPLru~S to
cover the CONUS portion of processing. Such OPLAtlS ;nsure a greater
degree of coordination and un;formity than do the more general provisions
of an Army Regulation.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per B-15
-- ---~-~--
(b) Several of the key features of the other Service programs

not currently incorporated in Army doctrine are presented here:
1. Detailed "Concept of Operation" which sets the
appropriately sympathetic tenor for receipt/processing of returnees
(~GRESS/RECAP-riavy) •
2. Detailed public affairs guidance to include

verbatim brief to De given to all returnees (EGRESS/RECAp-rlavy, r1arine).
, 3. Specific guidance on the use of Service chaplains
to provide spirituil assistance to the returnee!!!!! to his family
(EGRESS/RECAP-flavy) •
4. Comprehensive information briefings which bri-ng

the individual up-lo-date on significant current ~vents (EGRESS/RECAP-
Air Force).
- 5. Personalized brochures provided to the returnee

for his information and convenience (EGRESS/I1ECAP-Air Force).' _
17-Apr-2009
This document has
Army letter dated MJlrch 5, 2009
.'
...
1\ f"(" :-i ~ <
APPENDIX' C C' (\".1'

J L.,t" h,) ....... :
~,.l~
I •. _ U
. ~ FOLL0\4-~N:'~~T~,~1 APPENDIX (U) I .

, '
1., (U) PURPOSE. The purpose'of'thfs'appen,dix is te identify relate~
areas'that cannQt be' sol ved"wi th1n"the-St;ope of the::t1:Irrent study.', In
every case" these' topics were' discussed' in' the' course ,of in-proc~ss I
reviews at which the proponent act; vity was represented. JUhat is pre- !
sented here' 1's the consensus" of' those' tn:..process rev; ews./ '
, '
2. N CONSIDERATIONS FOR PRESENTJP'ION. OF ~CTRINE:

'. \ f' a.' N. Discussion:
, ' , (1) (U) The study was deve19ped' under the pr~m;se tha,t USACDC
fo"rmul ates doctri ne and CONARC' provides·'the' techniques for implement-
ing doctrine. Often, however, the two areas appeared to overlap, and
one had to be considered 1n order to evaluate the other in its proper
pl!rspecti''k. ",' ,
(2) (U) As has been shown fn tile mair:l body of the study-, what
doctrine exists in the area of capt,ured/detained US mi litary per~onne'l'
is proliferated throughout a' great number' and: var·iety of documents. .
r~uch of the'"doctri ne l! is that' whi ch 'ts 'p'r.E!'scribed for environments
other than that'of' captivity but whicb'tla:s'~ direct' applicabi~ity to the
latter state. Army training can' be ! mol"e"effective than the doctrine,
,it imparts.' As doctrine for capture. " a:iTled' US'military personnel h,
widely diffused and-net"censci'ously interre1ated, training.is degraded
a
'to the' same 'extent. Although"thE! 'seldier"receives censiderable amount
of informatiGO: wht~h waul d' be of' asststance' to him shoul d he fi nd
himself a prisoner of war, there is only one subject that he receives
'that by design is directly related to the internment situation. Tha~
subject is the Code of' Conduct'o'
(3) (U) The implementing Army Regu'lation, AR 350-3f), "Code'
af ,Canduct,1I dated 8 July 1968, is quite explicit as to what should be
taught. Unfortunately, tbuch of what shQuld be taught is not curre-n'i1y
~n ~fiel~ manual: The doctr~ne' upon'which Code of Conduct 1nst~b~ _
1S based 1n nonex1ster(t. Hav1ng recogntzed this', the study makes nUll¥!r:'ous,
, recanrnendations for additions and' revisions' to' the primary manual in I: ' '
tmt concerned ,doc:trtnal area~"FM 21-76', Sur-vi val, EvaSio~ and Escape~t ' { .j
The reconrnend.~fons explicitly nominate' PR'21~16 rather an an ,

associated mah~al which'might be more topical' to 'the specific recommended
area, because of the, desire to coni);ne all doctrine perta.ining to' ,j
captured/detained personnel under on!!! cover. In .fact, despHe the'
17-Apr-2Q09 .
This document has
,•
C-1 ;.
NCl,It.!~ iihJ cD
curren t program t. reduce "the" nUDtJerof "fj e1d ";'nuU
import of this dactr111a1 'area"i"s~corrsidered to be of such a magnitude as
to offer as an alternative a major rewrite of FM 21-76, the creation of
a new field manual entit~ed,'"Doctrtne-for Prisoners' of War.l!
(4) .. (U) If the premise -that--dt;)ctrine for captured/detained US
personnel' should~Be incorparated- tnto-a'·s1ng1e- source document is
correct, then it foHows' that 'such' doctrine should be taught as a
single integrated subject. ' This' i's 'the"concept under which' the US Navy
and the US"Air Force functi'on;' Bath of'these Services provide blocks
of instruction in which survival, evasTon,'escape, and resistance
are' correlated and structured'to meet .. the' parti cular need of the target
audience; i.e., increasing the intensity of the training in proportion
ta the "risk of capture" potential of the stuCient. (For details of Other
Service Pragrams. see Appendix K.) Even their basic personnel receive.
a minimum £If instruction on what to expect shauld they become prisoners
£If war. It appears an inescapable conclusion that the US Army is not
, .
living up to its obligations to the US soldier. '
(5) (U) The Army, by its organization and mission, has a

requirement to train far more "high risk" personnel than does any other
Service. There is no higher risk than meeting the enemy face-to-face
on the battlefiel d. Every combat sol dier, (and cOnDat support sol dier) .
upon entering the 'combat area becomes a high risk. In a low-intensi.ty
conflict, the nurrtlers lost may be minimal. In a mid-intensity conflict
(canventional war) ·where major elements face each other and break-
throughsand envelopments occur, the dangers of capture are significantly
high. The soldier, once captured, will have to rely on his moral
fiber, self-confidence, and his training in order to survive. The
Army can only reinforce the first two-~it can arganize and maintain t~~
last~· In this respect. tne pr,oblem the ArmY faces is twofold: it must
identify high risk AnY\Y eleme'nts, and it must provide training for
large nuooe.rs of P&;;s.or.mel who require a 'basic knowledge of internment
surv.4wal,,·an-a resi·stance·.
(6) ~ In' order to assure that the ~st soldiers recehe
the mast training in the most efficient manner and at a reasonable cost,
it is worth considering the manner in which the Central Intelligence :
Agency approaches the ·training of its ·personnel. (See Other Servi·ce
Programs, Appendix K.) The major topical areas within doctrine for
captured/detained US military personnel readily lend themselves to an ;
integrated, progressive film series. A segment. on uResistance ll coul d '
describe the Communist management principles and the positive steps
(techniques) the PW can take to lessen their impact and effectiveness.
Another segment could deal with "Internment Surviva1. 11 Here the soldier
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified'~AW
C-2
Army letter dated March S, 2009
. )
·. ,
8lMf'DE~I'I."L Ur\~CLt 7~~~iED

could learn proper exercises 'to perform which would be most beneficial
to survival. It would also include the principles'on how to treat com-
mn internment diseases and injuries without the aid of commerciany pre ...
pared medicines. Personal hyg1ene and area sanitatien, usiR9 material in-
d1gen0us. ta the prisoner of war camp, cou,ld be covered at this time
with particular emphasis on why such activity is crucial to survival.
"Evasion· and Escape Techniques and Survival ll could constitute a third "
sepa.rate 'but related topiC which easily lends itself to the medium of
film. : And fina1lys in a shorter but no less important segment, the ArmY'$
Assistance to the. pw, and: ijts<,',familyil could be presented. This topic,
near.ly c0mp1ete1y overloob!ct-t'y'ccur~r:1t training, becomes a matter
of paramount concern to the prisoner of war, but at a time when it is
too late .for the Army to provide him the lI'anxiety calming" information'
that I!the Army takes 'care af its own",! Al.1 these subareas under doc ....
trjne for captured/detained US military personnel are key to survival--
survival with hon~r. If the US soldier knows basically what to expect
if capt~red,. and what he can do to enhance his chances to survives chances
are he will survive. At least. his psychological fears at the ITIOOlent .
of. capture and those that he will live with for the duratian of his
captivity will be lessened. There are few· programs in the Army today
that for such a minimum of effort such a potential reward can be reaped ... -
a returned prisoner of war grateful to hi~ Service for teaching him
how to survive a degrading, debilitating.and, not uncommonly, fatal
envi ronment.
(7) (U) If accepted as a means for presenting doctrine for
captured/detained US m1litary personnel, the film series would offer
sign'ificant'advantages over subject lectures, command information
lectures, or student seminars. Perhaps t~e two key advantages are
uniformity of presentation and mass dissemination.
{8} (U) The IIhaw u of presenting the material in the film
0ffers wide 'alternatives. Dramatization~ of PW life are perhaps the
most animate, But, unless done '.with tact 'and art, can eas ily be over...
0r under-played. The use of a lecturer talking with authority about
the key subjects as a tested solution as it is the one used by the
Central Intelligence Agency in their film'sequences. This method would
be particularly effective if the speaker were a former prisoner of war
speaking author1tative1y and animatedly about the physical and psycho-
logi cal stres.ses.....ef capture and internment. The "howl! of presenting
the material is crucial to assuring comprehension and retention of the
inf0rmation being offered. ,:, It must be remembered that the primary
target is the combat infantryman. The information must be provided
in a.manner and at a level which will best assure his acceptance of it.
17-Apr-2009
This docu,ment has
been declassified lAW C-3
EO 12958, as amendr.d, per
Army lett~r dated~March 5, 2009
L
· (9) (U) The Al"IT\Y has soldiers whose quties place them in a
higher risk ca~gory than that of the cambat infant~man (see Section 5.
Chapte,r 4). The Special Farces seldier and the aircraft crewmember
may deserve 'a mOre intensive course of instruction than' that provided
anyone elseo In reply ta a query sent by' CONARC to all the Service
scheels. 75 percent replied that a need existed'for a special school
fer high risk persannel. It is conceivable that the needs of these
individuals cC:)uld be met by the film series, as it may not be feasible
to establish a special schoal. The establishment ef a special school
would require staffing and physical plant. The goal would be to expose,
the high-risk category persennel to a mock internment situatien complete
with interrogations. indoctrinations, isolation cells, and~ as in the
case of the Navy, cantrolled physical abuse. Such a venture if under-
taken weuld be expensive and, for the cadre and students, time-consuming.
(lO) (IJ) InaSmU~.Jls two siste'r Services have considered the .
merits of such a program te-be worth' the effort and expense, it appears
, prudent that the appropriate activity within the Army (i.e., CONARC)
evaluate the IIh1gh risk of capture training programs of the other
U
Services for poss1b.1e application to ArmY training.

b. (U) Recommendations:
(1) That DA task CONARC to determine the 'feasibility of presenting
"Doctrine far Captured/Detained US Mil itary Personnel" through the medium
of a training film series. .
(a) Presented doctrine should reflect the contents of this
study.
(b) If favorably cansidered. scenario and production
shauld be cQordinated with USACDC.
(2) That DA task CONARC to review and evaluate the "high risk
of capture" programs of the US Navy and US Air Force for PQssible
appl i cation to traini ng CONARC-identi fi ed IIhi gh-ri skU personnel •.
3. (U) ARTICLE 31 WARNING DURING DEBRIEFING:
a. (U) Discussion:
(1) (U) Article 31, t:JCMJ t "Compulsory Sel f-Incriminat1on
Prehibited. reads as folhw~:l
1I
1 Uniferm Code af Military Justice - 1951 1 p. A2-12.

17-Apr-2009 .
This document has
(a) He perspn subject td this· cnapter may compel
any person t~ incriminate. himself or to answer
any question the answer tb which may tend to
incriminate him.
(b) No person subject to th';s chapter may
interrogat~. ~r re~uest any statement from. an
accused or a person suspected of' an offense
withaut first informing him of the nature of
the accusation and advising him that he does
not have to make any staterren~ regarding the
offense of which he is accused or suspected and
that any statement made by him may be used as
evidence against him in a trial by court-
marti al.
(c) No person subject to this chapter may
compel any person to make a statement or produce
evidence before any military tribunal if the
statement or evidence is not materi a1 to the
issue and may tend to degrade him.
(d) No statement obtained from any person in
violation of this article. or .through the
use of coercion. unlawful influence. or
unlawful inducement may be received in evidence
against him in a trial by co~rt-wartia'.
(2) (U) Past Procedures:
(a) Korea. The official instructions to the interrogators
of the Big Switch returnees gave guidance with respect to the reading of
Article 31 (UCMJ). The instructions provided that when suspicion of
a returnee was developed during the course of an interrogation, a warning
af hi's rights (Article 31) was to be read. This warning was to be
accompanied by a statement that previous testimony given by him cannot
be used a9ai ns t . ~.i m. . .
(B) Southeast Asia:
1. Prior to the promulgation of AR 190-25, ItCaptured,
MisSing, or Returned US Army Personnel: Administration, Return and . .
Processing,1I in Noventler 1969. and Intelligence Command·OPLAN 107-71.
26 April 1971, all debriefing was conducted in accQrdance with AR 381-130,
. 17-Apr-2009
This document has
, .
EO 12958, as amended, per C-5
, ,
"Counterintelligence Investigations': Supervision and ControL" Oebriefers

were trained in counterintelligence and were, taken from their routine
duties to debrief returnees. '
2. AR 381-130 speci.fica1ly states that IIUS Army
Counterintelligence Special Agents are specially trained to detect treason,
sedition, subversive activity and disaffection, and for the detection,
prevention, and neutralization of espionage and sabotage. 1I2 The tenor
of this AR and the use of counterintelligence personnel resulted in the
interrogation of returnees rather than their debriefing.
3. These interrogations were preceded by a reading
of Article 31 (UcMJ) as explicitly directed by paragraph 5, Section I,
Appendix V (Debriefing Guides for Returned US Personnel) of AR 381-130.
, The result of a reading of Article 31, coupled with the interrogation
procedures being utilized, tended to detrimentally affect the free flow
of infonnation which 'is a prerequisite to a successful debriefing. 3
(3) Current Pl ans,=
(u)
(a) (U) On 26 Ap'ril, 1971, HQ, ,US Army Intelli gence
Command, promulgated the "US Army Intelligence Cornmand Prisoners of War
Debriefing Plan," whose short title is OPLAN 107-71, EGRESS RECAP-
Army (U). This OPLAN is applicable only in,large scale debriefing when
11 or more USPW's are released/recovered. If 10 or less are recovered/
released (small scale debriefing), the debriefing procedures are
governed by AR 190-25 and US ArmY Intelligence Command Regulation 381-100.
OPLAN 107-71 is concerned exclusively with the CONUS portion of the
debriefing while MACV OPLAN J-190 .contains the guidance for the in-theatre
debrief during the current hostilities in Southeast Asia. .
(b) (U) The suspicion of PW misconduct following Little
Switch which was prevalent at the time of Big Switch resulted in the
interrogation rather ~an the debriefing of returnees. Appendix V to
AR 380-130 which was used as a guide to debriefing' tn the earlier stages
of hostilities in Southeast ASia, shows a similar tendency to interrogate
misconduct rather than to debrief for information. Current 000 policy,
which is reflected in AR 190-2~, is a deriberate attempt to correct the
faults of the earlier debriefing 'procedures.
(c) (U) In regard to this, AR 190-25 provides identical
guidance for both the in-theatre and the CONUS debriefings:
2 AR 381-130, "Counterintelligence Investigations: Supervision and COl1-
t ro 1 ( U) t II (10 June 1966 ), p. 1- 2. '" .
3 Interviews conducted in March-April 1971 with returnees from enemY
control in SEA~
17-Apr-2009
This document has C-6
EO 12958, as amended, p~r
Army letter dated March ~, 2009
Debriefers will advise a returnee of his
rights under Article 31, UCMJ, and his
right to counsel only when previously
acquired information, ah accusation by a
fellow returnee, or a returnee's own
statement give reasonable cause for a
debr1efer to suspect the returnee of conduct
constituting a violation of the law. The
returnee's former status as a prisoner
of war or detainee must not give rise to
inferences of mi sconduct. If
Cd) (U) Such a correction was necessary because the
delicate relationship between a returnee and the personnel with whom he
comes into contact during initial processing was finally recognized.
Debriefing is a crit1cal element in the readjustment process, and
consequently, the debriefer has a great deal of responsib11ity which
includes t not only gathering information, but also functioning so as
to relieve the anxieties of the returnee.
(e) (U) Indication of surprise or criticism by a
debriefer lIis going to raise barriers to conrnunication which may never
be surmounted. The returnee expects the debriefer to lack understanding,
to be suspicious and even hostile." s The consequences of an unsympathetic
approach on the part of the debriefer is likely "to be a quiet belligerency
and anger on the part of the returnee which is hardly calculated to result
in the fullest possible body of infonnationo"6 There will be a great
deal of anxiety on the part of the returnee who is likely to realize that
"promotions, security clearances, and career all hinge on the degree to
which his debriefers interpret his experience with total understanding
of all of his environmental pressures, physical and psychologica'. which
were affecting him at the time."' •
(f) (rebe) The current practice of requiring the readi~
of Article 31 (UCMJ) only upon prior evidence or allegations by other PW's
~.
it AR 190-25, IICaptured, MiSSing, or Detained US Army Personnel: Ad-
ministration Return and Processing i:flette,U (Novenber 1969), p. 17.
fJ
S LTCDR William Buck, USN, PSfCholoaical Problems Associated with De-
briefing of Returnees fromoreign Prisons (0), (unpublisheo paper used
6y SERE Department, FAETOpAC, North Islana Naval Station, San Diego,
California), p. 1.
f> Ibi d.
, YDTa'.
-
17..Apr-2009
This document has
must be.considered a significant improvement over· the mandatory reading
requi red by, Appendi x V of AR 380-130. The gui dance for the readi ng of'
Article 31 (UCMJ) is the same for the CONUS debriefing as it is for the
in-theatre debrief.
, (g) (Fe~e) Certain other problem areas remain. There is
no specific guidance as to when the debriefing of a repatriate should be
interrupted for a reading of Article 31 (UCMJ). This is left up to the
individual debriefer's ability to discern when an individual is engaged
in self-incrimination. Furthermo~. personnel assigned to the debriefing
mission will not necessarily have extensive prior experience, although all
will generally have had counterintelligence. interrogation training.
(h) (V8~8) There exists the possibility that,intel1igence
requirements will be in conflict with legal requirements (Article 31
reading). This arises when an individual possesses needed information,
but his debriefing is effecti ve1y closed down by the reading of the ri ghts.
• (i) (U) Past history has shown that it is probably im-
possible to convict a returnee for his actions while in captivity
unless he was unmistakably traitorous or took actions against fellow
PW' s. The Corrbat Developments Conrnand Judge Advocate Agency offers
three possible alternatives to the reading of Article 31 (these are
pri nciple a1 ternati ves and not necessarily' all inclusive):8
1•. One position is that as a matter of policy all
returning POWIS should be warned of their'rights under Article 31 re-
gardless of whether an indtv1 dual is suspected of corrm1 tting any criminal
offense. Jus,tification of this position is,that the POW's interests are
'protected if he is first put'on notice' that anything he s'ays can be used
against him. ~econdly. if the POW does incriminate himself, litigation,:
at-trial of the Article 31 warning ,requirement before admission of the
statement'is minimized.
2.,. Another position is that only prisoners suspected
of ,an offense·shouTd be given an Article 31 warning. This warning could
. be given initially if the POW is suspected of criminal wrongdoing or at
any time during the interview when the interrogator first suspects the
POW of committing an offense. Th.is is the norma) investigative proQedure
• used by CID agents. .
8 letter trom USACDCJAA to USACDCSOA (U) (14 January 1972)
17-Ap"'~2Q09 .
This document has
been declassif~ed JAW
C-8
EO 12958, as amended; per
3. A third altemative is not to give Article 31
warnings to any POi'. Thi:S" position e""hasi-zes that the main purpose of
the interview is the acquisition of intelligence and the early rehabili-
tation of the individual.
, (j)' (U) The first two alternatives. by emphasizing the
Article 31 warning.' appear' tO'ignore' the"basl'c purposes of the inter-
view which a~ the' acquisit1on'of'intet'tgence-and to provide a vehicle
for .the rehabl'litation' of the "POW"after"hfs' pro'longed 'peri od of confine-
ment and' haras$ment'.' A11 ow; ng"the"fnte1"'Y'ogator- to determi ne duri ng the
interview when the POW becomes"'a"-suspeet"necessH'at~ ng an Arti cle 31 warn-
ing presupposes' an' unrea'l'tS'tic"degree-' of"'sopMs~·i.ca,tion on the part of
the interrogator; Exaggerated "and/or" incorrect- a'l1egations of misconduct
against, fellow' P<II's 'caused by"pers6na1ttY','bias, deprivation, hearsay,
distorted mental aberrations, etc., resulting from- enemy management ,
techniques could make many fnnocent POW's' appear to be gui lty of criminal
wrongdoing, thus necessitating an Arttc1e 31 warning. Any mistak-es ,as
to \'/hen warning must be given' would undoubtedly entlitter the POW
against the military and his country, and could cause serious psycho-
logical problems •. Congressional and public criticism of anything that
reflects treatment of our POW's as criminals can be expected to be
extremely severe.
(k) (U) The third alternative should be 'given careful con-
sideration. If an Article 31 warning is !'lot given, the most condud.ve at-
mosphere for intelligence gathering purposes is established; the purpose
of the interview,is facilitated; congressional and public criticism is
minimized; and the rehabilitation of the POW is enhanced. However, if
this approach is used, it must be emphasized that the statement made by
the POW to the i nte rvi ewer cannot be uti 1i zed for any adve rse purpose ,
whatsoever, either administrative or criminal.
(1) (U) This third a:1ternative,'does not'preclude criminal,
prosecution. If the PClI is suspected Df"criminal conduct, a later in- '
terrogation can be conducted and an Artir:le"31'warning given at this "
time. If the POW then incriminates himself, this statement can be ad-
~ mitted into 'evidence "if it clearly appears' that all improper influences
of the preceding interrogation had ceased to operate on the mind of the
accused or suspect at the time he made the state,ment" (para 14a(2).
to MCM, 1969, Ref. Ed.). Critics of this approach el11lhas;ze the desira-
bility of using the POW's statenent at trial. ' However, an accused can
never be convicted upon his own uncorroborated confession; and, further,
if the POW 'is actually a suspect before the initial interview, evidence
of an independent nature must have come to the attenti on, of military
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW .
authorities. Consequently, this 1ndependent ev1 dence mi ght be suffi cient
to convict an accused without resort to his confession. Also the proba-
bi 1i ty of' a POW admi tti ng to the corrmi S5i on- of an offense wi thout con-
siderable extenuation and mitigation to exonerate his conduct will pro-
bab ly be extrem:! ly rare. If. a· PO\~ accuses another returnee of crimi na 1
conduct, this could be reported to the CID for a separate investigation.
At this time all criminal evidence could be evaluated independently to
detennine its authenticity vis-a-vis exaggeration, hearsay, m:!ntal and
physica1 stress, aberrations, etc.
(m) (U) Another argument· against- the third alternative is
that Art; cle 31, UCMJ. requi res all' suspects to be gi ven a warn; ng re-
gardless of the c; rcumstances or purpose of the interrogati on; and that
only a grant of inmunity will allow the-omtssion of an Article 31 warn~
ing. This view is not supported by the Judge Advocate Agency nor ap-
parently by the other military services. The legislative history of Article
31 reflects only concern wi th crimi nal prosecuti ons and the inadmissibility
of statements in criminal proceedings. To say that no one subject to
military law cannot, at any time, take any statement, for any purpose
whatsoever, regardless of any and all circumstances, e.g., national
security, safety or accident investigations, IG investigations, report-
ing of social diseases, psychiatric evaluations, from any individual with-
out Article 31 warning once that person is suspected of criminal conduct
(without prior grant of immunity) appears to be a misapplication of legal
principles. It should also be noted that the only penalty for not warn-
ing a suspect under Article 31 is the non-admissibility of the statement.
The legislative history of Article 98 fails to support an Article 98
violation for not' following the provisions of Article 31, UCMJ.
(n) {U} In any event, outside evidence would be neces-
sary to con vi ct, and under normal ci rcumstances, hard-to-get inte111 gence
information is likely to be of more importance than the conduct of a
very sensitive prosecution which, to begin with, has only a slight
chance of resulting in' conviction. In strict legal terms this is not
to say. however that the information which emerges is classifiable as
II pr; vi leged COlTllluni cati on. II
Pri vileged Corrmuni cat; ons : is a te rm or art,

with a very specific meaning- in US law and
should not be used in relation to debriefing.
It ;s a communication made as an incident
of a confidential relation which it is the
public policy to protecto Generally, this
involves communications: (l) of classified
i~format1~n; (2) between husband and wife,
17-Apr-2009 .
This document has
client and attorney, penitent and clergymen;
and (3) to a 1imited extent, of an informant
a'nd Inspector General' {para. 151, MCM, 1969
(Ref.»). A debriefing would not readily
fall into any of these categories. It may
involve classified information, but normally
would, not be classified eer se.
This privilege m~ be waived only by the person
or agency enti t1ed to the pri vil'ege. Thus,
categories land 3 can be waived only by the
government. and category 2 on1y'by the individual
repatriate. As such the debriefer could not
enter into a privileged communication category,
since he is totally subject to his superiors in
categories 1 and 3 and factually cannot be
within category 2.
There is a "compromise" position. The debriefer,
can advise the repatriate substantially as
follows: IIThis is solely an i.ntelligence
debriefing for the purpose of finding out
exactly what happened in the internment
facilities. This information will not be
released and will be used only for official
government purposes and wi 11 not and can'not
'be used against you- for' any ad ve rs e proceeding.
Therefore, you should feel free to speak the
entire truth." Such advice would not be a
grant of immunity, would not establish any
"pri vileged communi cation;" would not be ; n
violation of the Uniform Code of t~il1tary
Justice. but would make any information gained
by, the debriefing inadmissible in a trial
of that repatriate by court-martial (Ar.t. 31d,
UCMJ:, para. 140, ,MCM, 1969 (Rev.)).9
,Co) (U) This is substantially the same procedure utilized
by the US Navy in the debriefing of the Pueblo crewmen upon their return.
The objectives of the Office of Naval Intell1gence (ONI) was a free flow
of information which required that there be no reading of Article 31
'9 Letter from USACDCJAA to USACDCISSO (U). (16 r1arch 1971)
17-Apr-2009
This document has
C-ll
Army letter dated March 5: 2009
(UCt~J). None of the information which emerged at these initial debrlefings
would have been admissible as evidence in a judicial ·proceeding.
b. (U) Recommendation. Recommend that DA (TJAG) publish guidance

which eliminates, except for cases specifically designated by DA CACSI!
CSSPER), the necessity for any reading of Article 31, UCMJ during the
initial debriefings of returned US Army Prisoners of War when such de-
b.riefings are for intelligence purposes only and not associated with con-
duct investigation.
4. (U) EVACUATION PROCEDURES:
a. (U) Discussion:
(1) (U) Past Procedures:
(a) (U) Korea:
1. (U) The returnees from Operation Little SWitch
were returned by alr to CONUS. Most of the repatriates from Operation
Big Switch returned by troopship or hospital ship from Inchon to San
Francisco. It should be noted that a proposal to retain the releasees
for 30 days in Korea, Japan, or Hawaii was rejected. 10 The rationale
behind this proposal was to enable medical and psychiatric treatment to be
carried out. The plan which. was actually implemented called for the
return of releasees via ship ~ithin about 15 days of release.
£. (U) The delay involved in returning by sea
rather than by air, resulted in the releasees forming group ties ~ith
one another aryd "offe!'E!d the men a necessary working -through period,
both for rea11ty testlng and a protective form of initial social exposure
10 Psychiatric Report of Little Switch and Big Switch prepared for

OTPMG ~ (1953), p. 2.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per ~-12
to 10utsiders l . " U However, it should be noted that some returnees
found the shipboard routine tedious and resented be1ng cooped up with
the sane personnel with whom they had bt!en t",r1soned. 12
, (b) (U) Southeast Asfa. Since June 1968, Department of
Defense policy has stipulated that " all returned personnel wi 11 be placed
under nedical auspices as soon as possible an'd evacuated to an appropriate
facility, normally in CONUS, when ned1cally and operationally feasible." 13
It was further directed that medical evacuation'channels will be used to
move returnees to CONUS med1 ca 1 faci1i ti es'. "A--later memorandum spec; f1 ed
that "aeromedical evacuation to CONUS" was to be utilized. llt
(2) (u) AR 190-25 directs that aeromedical evacuation to
CONUS will take place as soon as it has been determined that lithe returnee
has reached ,a physical and emotional state where evacuation to CONUS is
appropriate." lS This AR fu~ther stipulates that ll medical and personal
considerations will be paramount in determining evacuation time and
avail ability of the returnee' for debr; ef1ng and/or contacts wi th the
press. II I£. . , ' ' ,
(b) (U) The An-ed Services Medical Regulating Office

(ASMRO) channels are used for reporting when the returnee is ready for
evacuati'on. The mission of this office. is to "regulate or monitor
, the transfer of patients to medical treatment facilities having the
capability to provide the necessary medical care. u17 Overseas comanders
are notified ~ the hospital assignment of returnees through ASMRO .
subsequent to the Office of the Surgeon Generalis (OTSG) determination
of that ,ass; gnment. ,
11 Robert,T. Lefton. "Home by ,Ship: Reaction Patterns of American

Prisoners of War Repatriated from North Korea," ·American Journal of
Psychiatty (April 1954), p. 739.
12 Interviews' conducted in January 1971 with Big Switch repatriates cur-
rently on active duty at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
13 SecDef Memorandum (8 June 1968).
14 SecDef Memorandum (18 January 1969).
15 AR 190-25, Ope ci t., p. 17.
-
16 Ibid.
'
17 AR 40-350, "Medical Regulating to and Withi'n the Continental United
States. (U) II (3 Novenmer 1969) t p. 1-1. .
17-Apr-2009
This document has
C-13
.. EO 12958, as ~mended, per
(3) (U) Discussion:
(a) (U) As previously indicated former Big Switch repatriates
have indicated that the 15-day voyage took too 10ng. 18 There is some
evidence of resentrrl!nt by the repatriates at being confined with the
same men with whom they were imprisoned. 19
(b) (U) Recently, a recoll'1li1E!ndati on was made that a "halfway
house" be established. nAt this halfway house, the PW and his immediate
family should receive a short course on nutrition, malnutrition, ac-
cident prevention, marriage counseling, personal affairs (finance, re-
cords), and public relations."20 Sites suggested were Garmisch, Gennany,
Hawaii t or some CONUS facility. This procedure would seem to be a
compromi se between the need for a the rape uti c de 1ay and the desire of
the returnee to be reuni ted wi th hi s fami ly and be rei ntegrated into
society.
(c) (U) The Navy followed a procedure similar to the half-
way house concept when it brought together the crew of the USS Pueblo
and their families at Balboa Naval Hospital in San Diego. 2l H(Mever, one
deficiency in the procedures followed in San Diego was the lack of faci-
lities for allowing the returnees to meet with ~heir families in privacy
rather than in a large communal area.
(d) (U) One of the key problem areas for returning PW's
will be readjustment. A primary factor which must be taken into ac-
count in tenns of readjustment is II cultural shock." This is the "trans-
fer from a solitary, sedate existence to a modern, fast society ,.,here the
PW wi 11 be the focus of attenti on. n 22 The impact of cultural shock has
been kn(Mn to have a deleterious effect upon the physical and mental
health of returnees. "This cultural shock has been knOtln in the past
to cause somatic symptoms such as peptic ulcers, cardiovascular disease,
and a tendency to accident morbidity. Symptoms of anxiety, depression,
headache, insomnia, and gastrOintestinal complaints are to be expected." 23
18 Interviews, Ope cit.

19 Ibid. .
20 'O'fS"G", paper presented to the DOD Policy COl1Tl1ittee (4 February
1971).
21 Lloyd Bucher, Bucher: ~ Stor,X, (New York, 1970).
22 OTSG paper, oe. cit.
23 ~. •
17-Apr-2009
This document has
The halfWay house could 'mitigate the i~act of "cultural shock" and
facl 11 tate readjus tment. It coul d act as a buffer between the con-
trolled li-fe of captivity and the life of a free man.
b. (U) Reconmendation. That the Office of the Surgeon General
(OTSG) review the "halfWay house ll concept and if favorably considered.
forward an appropriate recommendation to the Army Chief of Staff for
cons ide rati on.
5. (U) PEACETIME DETENTION:
a. Discussion:
(1) Peacetime detention has not-been addressed. Each peace-
ti me occurrence is di s ti nct from the next in several part; cul ars :
cause of detention, goals of the detaining power, treatment of de-
tainees, and ultimate resolution of the situation by the involved na-
tions. Any concerted effort to address this area in the main text
would have detracted from the major topic of doctrine for the captured
US soldier.
(2) Illustrative of the occasions of detention involving US
military personnel are the incidents which have occurred since 1968.
In the 3-year period, five significant and varied incidents took place.
In each case, the problem was created by different sHuations and re-
sol ved uniquely. Bri efly, the i nci dents were:
(a) January 1968: North Korea seized the USS Pueblo and
towed it into Wonson Harbor. The crew was detai ned; n North Korea for
1 year before being released. The vehicle for their release was an
acknOtiledgement by the United States that the USS Pueblo had intruded
into North Korean territorial waters for the purpose of electronic
espionage. (Note: AcknOtiledgement was refuted by the US representa-
tive at-the time it was issued.)
(b) July 1~68: Eleven US Amy personnel were detained by
Cambodia when their boat accidentally violated the neutral border of
that country. The personne 1 were well-treated by the Cani>odians. but
they were detained for a period-of several weeks. An assertion by the
United States that it would make every effort to avoid repetition of
the incident sufficed to gain release of the 11 personnel.
(c) Au gus t 1969: North Korea shot down a US Army He 11-
copter which had accidentally strayed over the 38th Parallel. The
17-Apr-2009
This document has
C-1S
- -------------,--------:-----------------
three crewmerrbers were detained for 3 1/2 months. Thei r release was
contingent on an apology by the United .States for border violation.
(d) Novenber 1970: Two US Army generals were detained by
the Soviet Union for a period in excess of 2 'weeks after their light
aircraft strayed over the Turkey/Soviet Union border and accidentally
landed at an ai rpo'rt on the Soviet si~ of the border. As in the
case of the Cambodian incident~ the detainees were well-treated by the
detai ni ng p(7fler.
(e) March 1971: Four US Army soldiers serving wi th US
Forces in Turkey were kidnapped by' the Turkish Peoples liberation Army
(PlA), a terrorist group working toward the overthrow of the established
governnent. The four were held for ransom by the PLA but were ulti-
·mate1y released without payment.
-
(3) By no means do the above examples of peacetime detention
constitute all occasions of detention during the period. especially
if detention of US citizens, regardless of status; civilian or military,
was included. It is sufficient to state that such occasions are nu-
nerous and thei r increasing frequency adds a note of urgency to the
need for a comprehensive evaluation of the cause, effect, and solution
of the problems of peacetime detehti on.
. . -
(4) It would be logical to assume that much of the doctrine
developed and recommended for captured US personnel weuld be applicable
for detainees. This would especially hold true in the areas 'of what
they can say and what thei r conduct should be while interned or detai ned.
The peculiar nature of recent motives for detention in contrast to those
of capture indicate that it may be easier, t~rough security measures.
to avoi d detenti on than to avoid capture, esp'ec; ally in the case of hi gh
ranking officers/civilians. Conditions under which the detainee is
kept will most likely be less rigorous than that of the internee un-
. less the detaining p(7fler is a very hostile state such as North Korea.
There is, therefore, ,a logical argument for not expending additional
effort to develop or revise doctrine to handle the situation of peace-
time detent; on. The same concepts and expected code of behavi or whi ch
have been developed in this study for the normally more rugged detention
as a prisoner of war are equally applicable to the peacetime detainee.
This conclusion in no way undermines the increasing need for awareness
of the increasing frequency of peacetine detention incidents and the
corollary requirement to develop countermeasures to prevent such in-
ci dent~.
17-Apr-2009
This document has C-16
- Army letter dated March 5, 2009
b. Recommendation: That no additional time and effort be expended
to examine the adequacy of ex1sting/proposed US ArmY doctrine on in-
dividual conduct during incidents of peacetime detention.
6. (U) SPECIAL STAFF ACTIVITY:
a. Discussion:
(1) An area of concern recognized in Chapter 2 of this study is
the emerging practice of Communist governments to use prisoners of war
as pawns for attaining their political objectives. Generally, until the
Korean War, the repatriation of prisoners of war, both friendly and
enemy, was accomplished without fanfare or political ransom. The cessation
of the Korean War introduced a new strategy whereby prisoners of war were
used for political advantage and bargaining for world opinion and support.
Capitalizing on US public opinion for the quick return of USPW's, the
Chinese and North Korean Communists forced the US government to con-
sider the PW question as part of the armistice agreement.
(2) This practice has again emerged to a significant degree in
the conflict in Southeast Asia. The North Vietnamese and National Libera-
tion Front (Viet Cong) forced the US government to consider repatriation
of USPW's in Vietnam as part of the national policy for eventual with-
drawal. It can be seen that the political value of PW's is not in direct
proportion to the number of PW's held. Most likely in any future conflict
with Communist or Communist-influenced nations, the PW will continue to
be an instrument of negotiation as opposed to just a "casualty of the
war," removed from the action and 'awaiting the cessation of hostilities.
(3) The political importance of the PW has not been overlooked
by either the American government or private organizations. "Remember
our PW's" or other supporti ve slogans haVe been used to further aims and
to elicit support. A furor was created, both over condemnation of the
North Vietnamese/VC on the one hand, and the war on the other, using the
PW issue as the catalyst. The prisoner of war issue has become a matter
of critical importance to the nation and is relevant· not only to this
study, but to the individual Services to whom those PW's belong.
(4) Obviously, 'any factor that can influence national policy is
'. worthy of careful consideration by the Department of the Army and the
Department of Defense. It is critical that the Services be able to react
to developments within that factor. The prisoner of war issue qualifies
for·such consideration not only from the political/emotional standpoint,
17-Apr-2009
This document has
C-17
> I
but from the humanitarian aspect as well. , The manner in which the other
Services, vis-a-vis ,the Army, address their PW problems is the subject
of this di scussi on. . .
b. Other Servi ce' Speci al Staff Act; Vi ty:

(1) US Navy. The importance and sensitivity attached to the Pl4
question is attested to py the establishment of a special advisory posi-
~ tion with a direct line to the' Chief of' Naval-Operations (CNO) and a di-
rect line to the om·s subordinate staff"secti'ons in all matters relat-
il19 to and resulting from the' PW questi on~' 'The offi ci a1 ti tle of the ad-
visory ,position, is the "Special' Assistant' for PW Matters." This office
provides centralization of ~ffort and a focal point for all PW related
matters. It receives directives'from and disseminates information to the
CNO di rect1y •
. (2) The US Air 'Force:'
, (a) The Chi ef of Staff of the Ai r Force has tasked the

Director of Plans, Headquarters, USAF (AFXPD), with the responsibility
for planning, coordinating and directing all activity, pertaining to
prisoners of'war.
(b) In order to carry out this task, the Director of Plans,
ha~ further de legated ,one of hi s subordi nate staff secti ons, the Global
Plans and Policy Division (AFXPPG), as prim~ry point of contact for the
Air Staff on PW matters. This activity handles all queries and reviews
phns and policies directly or indire~t1y reJated to USAF prisoners of
war. ' '
. (c) The US Air Force has also' established the Escape and
Evasion/Prisoner of War (E&E/PW) Committee to coordinate and exchange
views. This committee, which meets once' a'month, is composed of the
var~ous Air Staffs. within HQ, USAF, which h'ave invnediate responsibility,
for :PlI matters t and is chaired by the representati ve of . .the Global
Plans/Policy' Division.'
(d) In' AFXPPG, the Air Force has a focal point for formu~
1a.ting policy matters pertaining to PW's. The AFXPPG does not have,
however, the direct lines of communication between action officer and
Chi ef of Staff of the Ai r Force, as the Navy Spec; a 1 Ass is tant does wi th
th,e ctlief of Naval Operations. .., " .
(.3) US Marine Corps. The r1arine program for coordinating intra-
Service PW matters is one of diffused responsibilities throughout their'
17-Apr-2009
,This document has
general staff. The primary staff responsibility for PW matters rests
with their Chief of Personnel Operations. There is no special PW staff
activity or convnittee which can coordinate the various General Staffs.
The desks responsible for handling PW matters do not have direct access
to the Commandant of the Marine Corps.
c. US Army Coordination of PW r4atters:
(l) Prisoner of war'matters at DA level are handled by nurerous
and diverse branches and activities. The Adjutant General handles
casualty and personnel matters; the Provost Marshal General considers
the legal (Geneva Conventions) and mi litary police aspects; the Surgeon
General has proponency for red; cal consi derations; the Chief of Support
Services handles personal effects and burial (if required); and the
Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence coordinates all intelligence
activities. All these activities are decentralized and function as
separate entities. Like the Marine Corps, the Deputy Chief of Staff
for Personnel is charged with the General Staff responsibility for the
Army Casualty and Personnel Operations Program.
(2) The US ArlT\Y has no centralized office nor is there an
established DA committee that convenes on a regular basis to discuss
and air problems in the PW area. Problems are resolved at the individual
activity level and. where such problems overlap areas of proponency, the
t\,/O or more DA activities involved are expected to coordinate and propose
a joi nt sol uti on to DCSPER.
d. Joint Cooperation:
(l) In the course of an arrred conflict it is normal for all
Services to have personnel in PW status; therefore. many areas (conduct,
family assistance, repatriation plans) should be as uniform between the
5ervi ces as possible.
(2)' A current solution to joint planning and cooperation was
the creation of a Prisoner of War Task Force under the Office of the
Secre~ary 'of Defense for Inte rnati ona 1 and Secur; ty Affai rs (OSO/lSA).
This Task Force is staffed with members of all Services and is charged
with developing joint policy on captured/detained US personnel.
,(3) To resolve day-to-day jOlnt problems. an ad hoc committee
was formed at the working level and entitled the "Interagency Prisoner
of War Intelligence Ad Hoc CORmittee (IPWIC).II IPWIC, established by
the Di rector, Defense Inte 11 i gence Agency on 23 Augus t 1967 9 addresses
17-Apr-2009
This document has
Army letter dated'March 5, 2009
intelligence matters"pertaini"ng to 'USPW and,MIA.personnel at'the intel-
1i genre working level. The p'rincipa1' task' of IPWIC, is ,to augnent and
facilitate the flow'of appropriate PW/MIA fntel1i.gence. to US Government
offices wi·th'rehted ope,rational. administra:l:ive. or poljcy responsi-'·
bi11ties. It provides a clearing house' for the exchange of PW intelli-
gence and a forum for the discpssion and resol~tion of related problems
and requi rements. It meets weekly or as often as the need di ctates.
e. Conclusions:
(l) Prisoners of war w511 continue, if not increase, in import- ,
ance as an instrument of national policy and as such will have conside!a~le
impact upon the Department of Defense in its efforts to meet and resolve
PW issues. ..
(2) There will be a continuing 'need for review of current ArmY.
programs in thePW area and ne~ or revised programs will require joint
Service coordination. '. '
(3) The US Navy and Air Force Special PW Staff Activities have
significant advantages over the programs currently in effect in the
Marine Corps and Army. These ~dvantages are:
',(a) ·A'single point of contact to deal with the entire
spectrum of PW matters is pravi ded.
, I,
(b) Intra-Service uniformity is insured.

(c) Quick response is possible •
. (d) "Action-level" intra-Servi ce and inter-Servi ce coordina-
tion and cooperation ;s facilita,ted.
f. Reconmendati on~ That the Departrrent of the Army review current
US Navy ~rid US Air Force Special PW Staff Activities for possible ap-
plication and incorporation witnin the Oepartme~t of the Army Staff.
7. (U) ·RECOt44ENOATl~S. The foll~ing represent a sunmati on of the
recommendations made in the preceding discussions:
a. That DA task CONARC to det~rmine the feasibility of presenting
doctrine for captured/detained US mjlitary personnel through the medium
of a training film series. '
17-Apr-2009 .
This document has
C-20
(1) Presented' doctrfne shou~d' reflect the contents of this study.
(2) If favorably considered, scenario and production should be
coordinated wi th USACOC.
b. That OA task CONARC to review and' evaluate the IIhigh risk of

capture ll programs of the US Navy and US A~r Force for possible application
of training CONARC-identified uhigh risk" Army personnel.
c. Recommend that OA (TJAG) publish guidance which eliminates, except
for cases speci fi cally des; gnated by' CA' (ACSI/OCSPER), the necessi ty ~'
for any reading of Article 31, UQMJ-during'the initial debriefings of
returned US Arrqy Prisoners of War 'when such debriefings are for intelli-
gence purposes only and not associated with conduct investigation.
d. That the Surgeon General revi ew the "halfway house" concept for
process i n9 returned US Arrqy pri soners of war and t if favorab ly assessed t
forward an appropriate recommendation to the Army Chief of Staff for
cons; deration.
e. That no additional time and effort be expended to examine the

adequacy of existing/proposed doctrine on individual conduct during in-
cidents of peacetime detention.
f. That Department of the Army review current US Navy and US Ai r

force Special PW Staff Activities for possible application and incorpora~
tion within the Department of the Ar~ Staff.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW C-2l
APPENDIX D
REFERENCES'
1. BOOKS:
Biderman, Alber.t D. March to calumf*: The Story of American POWs
in the Korean War. New York: e ~1acmillan Company, 1963.
Brandt, Ed. The Last Voyage of the Pueblo. New York: H.W. Norton &
. Co., 1969.
"I"
'
'fj
Bucher, Ct1DR Lloyd t~_ (USN). Bucher: fiy Story- New York: nouble-
day & Company, Inc., 1970.
Cantril, fladley. Soviet Leaders and r~astertover Man. New Bruns-

wick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 960.
Conquest, Robert. The Great Terror. New York: The r1acmil1an
Company, 1968.
FehHng, H.M. One Great Prison. t~ew York: Beacon 1951.
Kinkead, Eugene. In Every W!1r But One. New York: vJ.W. Norton e-
Co., 1 9 6 3 . ' .' . ,
Rees, David. Korea, The Limited War. New York: St. 'Martinls Press,
1964. '
Rowe, MAJ James N. (USA). Five· Years to Freedom. Boston: Little,
Brown ~ Company, 1971.
Solzhenitsyn, A. The First Circle. New York: Harper & Rowe,

1968.
\~hite, \-J.L. The Cactives of Korea: An Unofficial Hhite Paner.
New York: Scri ner's, 1957.
2. ART! CLES :
Bailey, SP5 Tom (USA), "PW or MIA: Kidnapped Without Ransom,"
Soldiers, Vol 26, No 7,1971.
17-Apr-2009
This document has 0-1
Armv letter dated March 5. 2009
_ .... -.-----------~---------
Ball, COL Harry (USA). "POW Negotiations," Naval War Col1ese Re-
view, Vol XXI, No 1, September 1968..
~.,
BU.fge$S, Carter L. IIPrisoners of War: Foreward," Ce1umbia Law

Review, Vol XVI, 1956.
"Can ~~er1d Opii"IiQIi Sway Hanoi?1I Air Force and Space Digest; Vol 52;
.December 1969. ,.
Chandler, Ruth. IIThey Wait and Hope," Family Magazine, '·1arch 4,
1970.
IIChanges Made in POvJ Code,lI Air Force Times, Vol 25,28 October
1964.
"Cengress Focuses on POW Problem," Armed Forces Journal, 27 Septem-
ber 1 9 6 9 . ' .
Ernst, tLW. "Two GI's in Limbo: The Smith McC1ure.Case,1I Nation,
VQl 202, December 1969.
Gal1ery, AIJ.t Daniel W. (USN).. "We Can Baffle The Brainwashers~n
Saturday 6venin~ Post, Vol XX, January 20, 1955.
Holt, CMDR Philip R. (USN). "Prisoners of War: Perscriptive Conduct
and Compliance in Captive Situations," Naval War Co11ese Review,
Vol XXI, No.4, December 1968. ' _
UHow the Prisoners Were Re1eased,".I.ir!!., August 15,1969.
"Laird Orders Revie~1 of PGJ Kin Aid," ArmY Times, t1arch 19, 1969.
Landerman, P., liMy Life as a Soviet Prisoner,lI Saturday Evening
~, Vol 239, January 15, 1966. " . .
Lifton, Robert To, M.D. "Home by Ship: Reaction Patterns of'
American Prisoners of War Repatriated from North Korea,lI American
Journal of PSYChiatry, April 1954.
Lmosbrock, John F0' IIPeace , Law, and Our Men in Hanoi, II Ed; tori a 1,
A~r Force and Space Digest, Vol 52, October 1969.
Ludvigsen, Eric Co, Ut41ssing, Dead, or Captured," Army t1agazine,

Vol 20, No 2, February 1970.
17..Apr-2009
This document has
0-2
b~en declassified lAW
Manes. LTe Donald L., Jr. (USA), Barbed Wi re Conmand! The Lega 1
II
Nature'of the Command'Responsibilities of the ,Senior Prisoner in

a Prisoner of War Camp," Military Law Review, Selecte,d Reprint,
1965. '
Marsh,all, BG S.L.A. (USA.,.ret.).' liThe Code ,and the Pueblo - Some
Ques ti ons and Answers til Ai r Force and Space Oi ges t, Vo 1, 5~,
July 1,969.
Mefzger, M. Dean, M. D. IIFollow-up Studf es of World War II and
Korean War Pri soners ,.. Ameri can Journa 1 of Epi demi 01 Ogy, Vol, 91 t
No 2, 1970.
~,
1I0r dea1 in the Desert: Making Tougher Soldiers to Resist Brain-

washing," Newsweek, Vol XLVI, September 12, 1955.
Parish, C~ndice. "ls My Husband Deaq or Alive?" Family Weekly,
Feoruary 1" 1970.
Pitzer, MSG,D~nie1 L. (USA). upOW: My Four Years as a Viet Cong
Prisoner," look, FePruary 18, 1969.
"Plight of the Prisoners: Treatment of North Vietnamese Prisoners,"
li!!!!, Vol 94, Aygust 15, 1969. '
Powell, Cr~ig. "Can World ,Pressure Open Hanoi IS Doors?" Armed Forces
Management, Vol 14, No 5, February 1968.
Prugh, George S. "Prison,ers at War: The POW Batt1eground,II Dickin-
son Law Review, Vol LX, 1956.
"The Pl,leblo Affair: Anatomy of a Cr;sis,'~, Military Review, July 1969.
Reese, LTC Thomas H. (USA). "An Offi cer ' s Oath, II Mi,l itar.y Law Re-
~. Vpl ~X~ t 1964., .
"Red Cross Campaigns for POWS," Air Force Times, Vol 30. 16
D~cenber 1969.
IIRelate the Code to the Man~" Air 'Force Digest, 2 Marth 1962.
Rich~rdson, 'COL Walton K.- (USA). "Prisoners of War as Instruments
of Foreign Policy,1I Naval War'College Review', Vol X,XIII, No 1.
17-Apr-2009 SepteJDber·1970. "
This document has
Army letter dated March 5, 2009 0-3
,
Rigg, COL ,Robert B. {USA-:ret.). "ls the Code of Conduct Deqd?U "
.8!ml, Vo 1, ,19,, Marth, 1969.
. . . "
Smith,. MAJ Eli zabeth' R~, Jr. (USA). uTh~ Code of Gonduct tn Re1a ..
, 1;10n ~o international Law,'11 Military Law Review,' Vol X.,X~[,',
January ,1966.
IIThi$ Wee'k in Defense: Pueblo-What Went Wrong, II Armed Forces',
Journal, ~ August 1969.
"Unanswered Q4esti ons ,1/ Newsweek ~ Aygus ~ 18',. 1969.
IIUnit Eyes Code of
,
Conduct," Ai'r Force Times, 13 August 1969. , ,
Wea~er, ~OL John' (USA). "Code of. Gonduct: The Soldter-P.~triot's

Antidote to B~a;nwashing~1I Army Information Digest;'Vol '16~ June
1961. , . .' , ' , '
West, Louis J., M.D. "Psychiatric Aspects of Training for Honor-.
, ab1e:Survival as a PrisC?ner of War," American Journalef Ps-ychiatry,
Vo 1 CXV. Octob~r 1958.,
Wes'terman" COL .George F.' (USA). Ulntern~tiona1 La!" Protects PW1S,"
Army Digest, ~ol 22,'~6 2, February 1967. '
u~ha t a Ma'n ~us t Do, II Newsweek, Vol XL VI, Augus t 29, 1955.
Wi,lson, LTC Paul E. (USMC). liThe, Three CiS: The Code, ,the Con..,
ven~i on, 'the ,Conf11 ct,!! Mar1 ne Corps, Gazette ~ . April '19~O.
Yesipov, B"P. and Gontharov, ,N.K. IIDeveloping Conscious ,Discipli,ne,1I
Peda90gika (Moscow), 5th edition~ .1950.
~. PU8Uf:;,ATIONS OF SCI~NTIFIC/ACADEMIC ORGANIZATIONS:
Prisoner of War Study. Harbridge House, [nc., BostQn,.30 June 1969.
Schein .. E.H. Roles - Not Rules - For the POW. Bureau of ' Social .-
Science'Research, Inc. for.the US Air Force ,Office of Scientific
"Res,e~rch. W~sh;ngton, September 1963.
,
4. UNPUaLISHED'MATERIAL~:
BU~k,· LTCgR·Wi1liam (~SN).: "Psychologic~l Problems Associa~ed

~i.tliDebriefing'of Returnees from Foreign Pr.isons." Unpublish,ed
paper, US Oepar~ment of the Navy, Fleet Airborne·Electronics Train-
17-Apr-2009 ing Uri,it. Paciflc, SERE Department.
This document has .
0-4
Army letter dated March "5, 2009
i,
DiMaura. LTC Vincent A~ (USAF). Memorandum for Record on Cooe,of

Conduct Training. 2 September 1970 •
• Untitled, public address before USAF'
--.":::"Se-m-'i~n-ar-,-.-:d""'el;-:i-v-:-er-:e:-;d:-::i2~,lr-Januar.y 1971.' ,
Mayer, LTC William E. (.USA). liThe Moral 'Imperative:. The Survival of
Freedom," de1ivere.d tp the 67th Congress of American Industry,
sponsoreQ by the ~~tional Associa~ion of Manufacturers, New York,
December 6. 1962.
Ryan,. GEN John D. (USAF.). Letter from the Office of the Chief of
-. Staff, United States Air Force. Subject: The ·Code:of Conduct.
12 February 196~~' 1 •
Stewart, MAJ Kenrift G. ;(USA).· Russian Methoc!s of Interrog~ting

Captured Personnel t- World W~r II •. Unpubl1shed study, Office of
the Chief of Mi li t&ry History', Washington, 1951. . ,' \
US Department of the Army. Headquarters, US Army Combat·Deve1op- \

rnents Cornmand~ , Letlter to US Army Combat: Developments Command, .
Institute for Stra.tegic and Stability Operations. Subject: USACDC
Proponency for Doctrine Pertaining to Captured:US Military Per- .
sonnel. Fort Belvoir, Vir§inia, May 1969. '
US Department of the Army. US Army Combat Developments Command
Judge Advocate Agency. ~etter to US Army.Combat Deve1opmen~s CQm-
mand, , Institute for- Stra~egic and ,Stability Operations. Subject:,
Debriefing of :,Prisoners of W~r. Char1ott~svil1e, Virginia, 16
March 1971. ,
' 1
US Department of the, Army. Office·of the Surg~bn General. Medical

S.ervicer~sponse to' Essential Elements of Analysis (EEA) for US
ArmY CQmbat Developments Command, Institute for 'Strategic'and'
Stabil i ty :Operati ons,. 17 Match .1971. "
US Departrr~nt'of the A~. Office of ~he Surge~n·General. Letter
to US Army Combat Developments Command; Institute for Strategic
and Stab;llity Operations. SU,bject:. Medical Prac,essing of ·Re-·
patri ated .Pri soners of War, 20 Apri 1 1971. !. '\
. . I· .
US Department of the Army. Report presented to· Department.of 'De-
fense PolicY,Committe~ Meeting.by LTC Josep~ R: Cata.1do (USA), '€hi.ef,
Communicable Diseas~s and Immunology Research Branch. US A~
Medical! Research and Development 'Command. Washington, 4 reQr-uary
1971. ' . < \ •
17..Apr..2009 \\
This d.ocument has
,
,
been declassified tAW
Army letter dated March .5, 2009
US Depar'tment of Defense. Joint 'Chjefs of S~aff Message No.S720,
"Code of Conduct and Rela,ted'Matters." Wa.shhlg1;on,.9 March 1966.
US Department'·of the Navy •. Letter from ,Commander, N~va1 Intelli-
gence 'Command 1;0 US Army Combat· Developmen~s Command, Institute for
Strategi c and Stabil fty Operati ons. Subject: ~ava.1. In~e 1'11 gence
Officer. Trqin1ng, 7 April. 1971. '
5. NEWSPAPERS:
Alden. Robert. "'Freedom Village ' 'Awaits Prison,ers," New York,
~, Apri14. 1953. ' .
"A Code of
. Behavior,". Editorial)
, New York Times, August 19, 1955.
"Escape and Evasion ,Competiti on Stresses Wartime Techniques ,,11
Fayetteville (N.C.) Observer, Apr;'l 9, 1970.
"Fami lies of POW's, Briefed,1I Fayettevi lle (N.C.) Observer" June
17, 1969. '
"Hanoi Denies Mistr'laating U~ Captives," Charlotte (fl.C.} Observer,

Septermer 1, 1.969. .
Marsh~11', BG S;~.A~ (USA-r~t.). IIMi1itary Affairs Analysis,"
Fayettevi'lle(N.C.) Observer, March 1, 1971.
"New Code' Orders P.OW's , to' Resist in 'Brainwashin'g'," New, York
~, August'lB,. 1955.
Ne~ York Ti'm.es ,. Apr~ ~ ~, 1953. 17-Apr-2009·
This do~ument has
New Yo,rk ~~ Al,lril 4, 1953. been declassified lAW
New York Ti'mes,
. A.pri
. 1 11, 1953. EO 12958, as .amended,
New York Times, J~pril. q, ,1,9,53. per
. . Army letter dated March
New York Times, ;Apr~l 20, ,1953.
5,2009 '
New York 'Ti.mes, '.April 21 ~ 1953.
N~w Y-ork I1.!!!.!. l\pril 24,
, 1953.
.
. ,
,I New York li!!!.P:!., t4,~ 2, 1953,
0-6
New Yor,k D!!!!..b May 5. 1953.
New York Times, ~ 8, 1953.
New York Times, July 27, 1~5·3.
New York Times, August 6, 1953.

N~w York Times, August 1.1 , ,1953
New York Times, August 12, 1953.
New York ~, January 28~ 1954.
"Pueblo Won't Affect t~e Code,lI WashingtQn Evening Star, March 18~
1969 ..
6. PERSONAL INTERVIEWS:
Cataldo, Lt.C Joseph R. (USA), ,Personal interview on medical related
prob 1ems, of repa triates . Fort Bragg. North Caro 1i na, 16-17 June
1971.
Loepke, CWO-,2 Malcom V. (USA), Personal 'interv,iew on prisoner of '
war experiences. Fort Bragg, North Carolina: 27 April 1971;
Orne, Martin, M.-D., -Personal interview on psychQlogic;al,problems .of
captlvi,ty .. University of ,Pennsylvania, Philadelphia: 8 June 1971.
Rowe, MAJ J~mes N. (USA), P~rsona1 interview on prisoner·of·war ex-
periences. Fort Bragg, ,North G~rolina: 31 March 1971 ..
Singletary, ~TC W.C. (USA). P~rs,onal in~erview.on medica1.pro~lems of
prisoners Qf war. Fort Bragg, North Carol,na: ?6 January ',197,1.
7. SPECIA~ .AND GOVERNMENT PUBlICATIONS:' '
Democratic Republic of Vietnam. VF AKA MRIF Mi1it~ry Pr.oselytizing
Section., Directive 425, untit1ed,'16 December 1~65.
Internati o~a 1. Commi ttee of the Red Cross. "Geneva Convent; Qns of
12 Au,gust 1949: Essential Provisions. Geneva: 1966.
II
Nation,a1 liberation front, South Vietnam •. IITen Year~ Crimes of

~S ImperialiSts and Lac~eys in SVN,II Lesson Plan II, undated.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW D-7
Army letter dated March 5, ,2009
N~tiqnal ·Liberation Front, South Vi.etnam. ,"The PoHcy of-the SVNNlF
With Regard to U~ Servicemen and Of1icers and US Satellite Troop~'in.
SVN, II ~esson Pl~n IV, ·undated. '
US Con~ress, House·of.R~presentatives, Committe~ on Armed·Services •.
Hear-ings Before the ·Spec1.al<Subeomi.ttee··on·;the:·USS ·Pueblo of. the
Commi ttee 'on Armed': servhes',: 91st,· Congress, '1st Sessio~. Wash,ing':
1;on: . US Govemmen,t Prt ~ti ng Offi ce ,.-1969,
US Department of the Air Force. Air Force Policy Letter for Co~
ma~ders, Sup, ,No 7-11':'14~ IIDefense Departrne.rrt; Pasition on, Prisoners
of War.,11 Washington: July 1969. .
US O~partment~f the Air·Force.· Survival, prepared for the US Air
Fo~ce Resistance Training Semlnar, 3636t;h Combat Crew Tr~;n;ng
Group (ATC), Fairchild Air ,Force Base, Washin,gton,:, 16 May 197Q.
US Department af the Army, Army Regulation 40-350, uMedical Re1at-.·
i n9 to and .Wi thi n the' Conti nenta 1 ,Un; ~ed S~ates .," Washi ngton: 3·
November 1969. '
US Depart~nt of the Army. Army Regulation 210-50, "Family Housing
Management.'11 W~shington: 6 J~nuary 1971-.
US Department of the Army, Army Regul at; on .340-16, "Safeguard; ng .
'For,Off'icial ,Use Only' I~formation.1I Was!:Jington:. 10 March 1970,.
US D~partment.of the Army,. Army ,Regu1 at; on ,,350-30; "Education and
Training: Code of Gondu~t." . W~sh1ngton: 8 July 1~68.
US Department of the Army. Army Regu1at.ion 350-216, IIT~e Geneva
Converytions 'af. 1949 and Hague Convention No IV ·of'H07." W~shing-
tQn:' 28 M~ 1~70,.. , ' ,
US Depqrtment" of the Army.' Army R~gl,J1ation ,350-225, "~urviva1'.
Evasi'on, and Escape Training.'1 W~hingt(m:, Ap.ril 1969 ..
US Depar.tment of the Ar-my .. Army Regulation 381-130, IICount~rintel
ligence Investig~tions: S~pervision··and,Contro1.": Washington:.
10 June 1966. '
US Oepar_nt of the Army. Arll'\Y. Regulation 600-100, liThe Arrn.v
C~suq.lty System. Washington: June 1968.
II'
US Department of the Army. Anny Regulation 643-50, "Disposition, of";

Personne 1 Effects Outs ide' Gombat Ar~as. Washi ngton: 13 October
II
19,65. 17-Apr-2009
This document has
.0-8 EO 12958, as amended,
per
2009
us Department of the A,nny. Army Subject Schedule 21-3, IIField
San; tati on. II Was hi ngton: May 1969.
US Department of the AnIlY •. Anny Subject Schedule 21-4, "First
Aid.!' W~shington: August 1,969. '
US Departmen~ Qf,the ArJIlY. Anny,Subject Schedule 21-1?, IISurvival,
Evasion, ~nd'Esc:ape.1I Washin,g,ton:' 4 Dec.ember 1'961.
US Department of th~ ,Army ~ Army Subject .Schedu1e 21-15, "Code of
Conduct~" Washington: 20 April, 1967.
US Department of the A~. AnIlY Subject S<;hedule 21-37, "Physi cal
~eadiness Training." Washing~on: September 1969.
US Department of the Army. Amy Subjec~ Schedule 27-1, liThe Hague
. and Geneva Conventions.1l Washington: April 1967.
US Department of the Anny. Army Training Program 21-114, "Male,
Mil i tary P~rsonne 1 Wi'thout. Pr; or Servi c~. II Wash; ngton:, 27
J~ly 1966', .
US Departmen~ of ~he Army. Assistant Cpief of Staff for Intelli-
gence. "List of US ArmY Returnees .as of·2 february 1970. Wash- II
ington:, 2 February 1970. '

US Department'of the Army, DA Pam 27-1, Treaties Governing Land
Warfare. Washington:: December. 1956.
US Department of the Anny. DA Pam·27-161-2, International Law,
Vol II. Washington:, 1~62.
US Qepartment of the Anny. DA Pam 30-101, Communist Interrogation.
Indoctrination and Exp1oitation: ofn·Prisoners"of~ War;" Washington:
1,956. ' - . '
US Department of the ArmY. Fi~ld Manual 21-10, Field Hygiene and,
Sanitation. W.ashington-: July' 1970. .
US Departme~tof the Army. Field Manual 21-13. The Soldier'S -Guide.
Washington: August 1961. .
US De.partment of the Army. Field Manual 2,1-20, Ph.ysica1 Readiness
Training. Washington: January 1969.
, 17-Apr.. 2009
. This document has
0-9 Army letter dated March 5,
2009
-------------
~s Department of the Army. field Manual 21-75, Combat Trainin of,

T
the Individual Soldier and·Patr.olHng .. - wastdngton: July§67.
US Department of the AT'IT\Y. Field Manual 21-76" Survival, Evasion"
and Escape Training .. ' Washington: April 1969~.
US Oep~r~ment ~f the.Army~ Field Manu~l ~7-10, The Law of Land'
Warfare. Washington: I JulY,19?6.' . , '
US Depar.tment of ~he Army, Field.Manual 30-5. Combat Intelligence.
Wasbfngton: J~ne 1967.
US Department of the Army. Field Manual 30:-15, Intelligence Inter- ~
rogati on. Wash; ngt,on:, March 1969.
US Depa~tment of the Ar-my •. Headquarters t US Anny C9mbat Devel.op-
ments Conmand. Fact "Sheet, Doctrine .for Captur-ed US Personnel, •
. F.o,rt Be 1vo i r; Vi. rgi Iii a: . 26 March 1969,
.
US Department.of the.Army. Headquarters, US 'Army Combat·Develop-.
. m~nts. COll1Yland. Study 01 rective. Ooctri ne for Captur,ed/Oetai ned
U{lited St.a~es Military Personnel. For~'B~lvoir.J Virgin1a: '22
Octaber·1969. ,
US Department of the Army. Headquarters, US Army Combat· Develop- ,
ments, COlTD11and. Study Plan, Doctri ne fO.r Captllred/Detai ned United
States M;.rit~ry Persol'!nel. Fort Belvoir. Virginia: 16 February
1970. " ..
VS Department of the AT'IT\Y. Office of the Provost Marshal 'General •.
Rev; ew of G'rant, MAJ' Lee B, (USA), ,'''Oper-ati on Big' Switc.h.: , Med; cal
Intelligence Proce~s·ing.1I WashiAgton: 4 February 1953.
·~S Department of 'tije Army. Office of tbe Surgeon General. Office
of the ,Clliet, Communicable D1seases and Inmun010gy Resear.c;h· Boa,rq!
, Rehabi·litation af Returnees', Washington: 29 January 19?1.. .
US Dep~rtment of the AT'IT\Y. US.Army Intelligenc~,Command., USAINTIC
Regulation 381-100," Debriefing Guide for ttie Proc;essing of Re-
turneq US Personnel {RECAP)·,1t Fort'Holabird, Maryland"
US Department of Defense. "Ameri can Pr1·soners of. War. and Miss'; ng
in Action in Southeast.Asia,1I Commander-I.s Digest:." Washington:'
16 J~nuary 19~1. 17-Apr-2009'
This document has
2009
US Department of Defense. Assistant Secretary of ~fense (Inter-,
nati ona 1 Secl,lri ty Affai rs) •. Memorandum. Medi cal/P.sycho10g; c~l
Ana lys is of Fi,lms. Phot.ographs. and Tape Recordi ngs. of, Captured
Ameri can Servi cemen ~ Washi ngton: 31 October 1.967. '
US -Department of Defense. Assistant Se.cretary of Defen~e- (Inter--
national Security Aff~irs). Report on the Implementation and Dis-
semination of the Geneva Conventions ,of 1949~, Washington.
US D~partment of Defense. Assistant S~cretary of Defense (Man-
power and Reserve Affairs). Memorandum. Dossiers for Personnel,
Missing-in-Action ~nd -Cap~ured. Wash,ington: - 3 August 1966.
US Qepartment of D~fense. Assist~nt Sefretary of·Defense (Manpower
and Reserve Affairs). Memorandum. Prisoners of War in Southeast
Asia. Washington: 14 March 1967.
US Department of Defense. Defense Advisory Committee'on-Prisoners
of War. , POW .:. The 'F; ght 'Conti nues After' the"Battl e', Wash; ngton:.
Augus t 1955. .
US Department ,of Defense. Departmen~ of Defense Directive. 1000,1.
"Issuan,ce of Identity-.Cards Reqtlired by the ~eneva ConventiQn."
Washington: 31 December 1964. '
US Department of Defense: Department of Defense Directive .1300.7 t
"Training ,and Education Measure~. ,Nec,?ss.ary to Support,the Cod~ of

Conduct. II WashinGton: 8 July 1964.
US Depa~tment'of,Def~nse. Department of .Defense Directive 1300.9,
, "C~sua 1ty Procedures, for M.l 1~ tary PersonneL II Washi,ngton: 6
Apr; 1 1967!
US Departme,..,t of ,De,fense. Department of Defense Of recti ve .5105.18 t
"Department of Defense Committee Management Program. "Washing-,II
ton:. 25 August 1959.

US pepartment of Defense. Department of Defense Directive 5105.21.
"Defense Intell igence Agency. II. Washington: 1 August 1961.
US Department of Defense. D~partment of Defense Directive.5230.7 •
.~ "Censorship Pl anning. II Washington: 25 June 1,965.
US Department of Defense. Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel.
Memor~ndum. Meet; ng ~etween Vi ce, Chi ef of Staff. ArJIlY. and Mrs.
, 17- Ap r- 2009 Iris Powers. Washington: 23 November 1970.
This document has .
Army letter dated March 5, 2009 D-11
US :Depa('tmen~ of ·,De,fense.·, ,000.- 'Military 'PaY~'and .Allowances' En- .
ti,tlements. Manua1. .... Wash,ington·:: 1 January.1967:
us Department of Defen,se. Deputy Secretar.y' of '. Def~nse. Memorandum,
Policy for,Proc~ssing of ,Returned US Priso~ers of War\and Other·
Detained,Mi'litary Personnel.. Washington: 8 June 1968.
US Dej}artment of· Defense. Deputy ,Secretary of .Defense. ·Memorandum,
Po 1i cy anc;! Process i n9 of Returned US ,Pri soners of War and' Oth~r D~
~ained Mi.1itary ~ersonnel. Wash;ng~on: ( 18 January 1969.
US Departmen't of Defense. Deputy Se,cretary of Defense. Memorandum",
Space Available',Travel for Wives and Depen,dent',Chi1c;1re~ of'Mi~s;ng
in.Action and Gaptureq ~ersonnel. Wa,shington: 18 Janua,ry 1969.
US Department ,of Defense. DOD GEN 28, The US ,Fi ghting ,Man s Code. I
Was,hi.ngton: 5 June 1967.

, ,
US Department of Defense. OOD',GEN 35, PW: Your . Ri.ghts and Obliga-

ti ons ,Under the, Geneva:,ConvenUons'" . W~shtngton: 1 SepteRber 1969.
US Department of Defl;mse. Se,cretary of Defense Me.moray'!dum, Policy, ,
, for Process i,ng of 'R~turned US ,Pri soners of W<;1r and Other Det~i ned
Military Personnel. Washington: 30 November 1968.
US Department.of Defense. Se~re~ary of Defense ,Memorandum, Policy
for' P~ocessing of ..Retur.ned, US" Pr; soners df War. and Other Detained
Military Personnel., W~shingten,: 18 February 1~71.'
US Department'of Defense. United S~ates MilitarY'Assistance Com-,
mand, Vietnam. MACV ~amph1et No',l,4-16, "Application of trye Geneva"
Pri soner ,of 'War: Convent; on i IJ Vi etnam.," APO San Franci sc;o: Sep-
tember·197Q. ' ,
US ~partment of 1;he Navy. Bureau of Naya 1 . Personne 1. BUPERS',
Instruction 1610.9~. IlTril~l1ing ane Education ',Measures Nec~ssary
t,o Support the Code of. Conduct." W~shi,ngton: 22 September 196~.
US Department of the Navy. He~dquarters, ,Un'; ted StatEts M~ri ne Corps',
M~r;ne Corps Order 1510.2E, "General Military ,Training ,of ,EnliSted
Men." Washington:, 27 May 1968. '
US ,Department of the Nayy .. Off; cer Persor:mel.. New~ 1Eltter, NAVPERS-

15892, Vel 14, No 1. Washington:' July ,1969.
, . . .' 17-Apr-2009 ,
. This document has
2009
US Department of State., "Department Ghes Views ,on' Proposed', Con- ,
gressional Resolution' on',US P.risoners of War in Southeast Asi'a,1I
Department of State Bu1'1eti nr. Wash; ngtoD: 25 May 1970.
US Department of State.. Department ·of State--Bu'l1etin'i . Washingtot:l:
6 November·1953.
US ~partment of State. uRed Cross 'Calls for Application:'of C<;m-
vention to War Prisoners," Department'of State Bullettn. Wash-
ing~on:, NoveM>er 1, 1965.' '
US Department of Sta~e. "Treatment of American prisoners:of War
in North Vietnam," Deeartment of 'State'But'let1n~' - 'Washingtol): .
December 22, 1,969.
US Department of ,State. "l1nite~ States Brings, Hanoi's Treatment
of American Pr.isoners of' War ,to Attention. of UN COlTll1ittee~II'Depart
ment ,of State Bul.1etin~· Washin.9ton.: Oec~mber 1, 1,969.
Young, Kietjl Douglas. "legal and Actu~l Status ,of C~ptured USPer-,
sonne 1,11 SERE' Memorandum No .. 2-: us Depar~ment of' the Navy. Fl eet
Airborne Electronics Training Uni·t, Pacific. San 01 ego., ,C~li,,:,
. fo-rni a :. 1 March 1970. '
8. ClASSlFIED REFERENCES:
Defense Intell; gence Agency. Pri saner of War"Detentfon' Installa-
tions 'in,the HanQi"Area {tl};.,wash1ngton:" M~y' 1968., (~ECREn.
Defense Intelligence Agency~ 'Specific Intelligence Collection Re-
quirement D-7CX-490W, nprisoner'of ,War Debriefi.ng Intelligence
{U).II Washingtot:l: 30 Ju1y 1970. (CONFIDENTIAL).
US DepartpJent of the Ai r Force. Headquarters, Uni ~ed States Ai r .

Force, Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Evasion and
Escape Branch. liLt. Charles F.-Klusman: Prisoner of the Pathet
lao. Evasion and Escape"Memarandum No'; ,8; ··Wash'i·ngton .. (SECRET
1I
NOFORN) •
,US Department of the Air Force. Headqu~rters, United Stat~s'Alr
Force. EGRESS RECAP-~ir Force. Washington: 1 July 19~8. (~ON-
FIDENTIAL). ' ,
US .Department of the Army. Assistant Chief 'of Staf~ for Intelli-
gence,. ACSI File 350.055, An.nex 2 (Revised), ,uIntelligence Pro-
ces.si ng 'and Procedures to 'Operati ons Pl an' AFFE 1-53. ~I Wash:-'
17-A pr-2009 ington: 6 July 1953. (CONFIDENTIAL).
This document has ' . .
D-l~
Army Jetter dated March 5,2009
US·Depar.tment of the Ar"!l1Y'" Assistant. Chi'ef of·:Staff for'InteJ1i-
gence.' AGSI ·File 350.055,- I!Psyctli.atric:Repor~.of·litt1~ and Big·
Switches." Washin,g~on: '4 .Februar.y.1~53~ '.(~ONFIDENTIA~).,·
US Department 'Of the Army. Army' Security Center.: US Prisoners .,of· .
War· in the Korean 0ieration',(U): Fort' George G. Meade~ Mary-
'land: Nove~er 195 •. (CONFIDENTIAL). '
US Department of the Army.'. Field M~nua1 ,21-77A, Joj'nt'Wor1dwide
Evasion and Escape Mar-'lUa:1=··(U}:.\' Washington:' 1 'August 1967.
(SEC~Ef).· .
US Dep~r~ment of the ~rmy. Offi c,e of the Provos ~ M~rsha 1 Ge~era 1..
"Ana1.ysis of the ~eport of the Japan Joint Intelligence. Processing
BoarQ." (ACSI File ,350.055)'. Washington:. 31, O<;tober 1953 (CON-
FIDENTIAL).' " ,
US Department of the Army. Offi,ce of ~he ProvQst. Marsha1·Gener.a1 ..
Army:,Regu1ation 195-25, "Captured, Missing, or Detai.ned·'US Army
Persol']ne1: Admini·stratiQn~ .~eturn" and Processing:" Washington:
9 June 1971. (F;OR OFFIGIAL ~SE ONLY).
US 0epartment ·of the Amy. Army Regu1 at; on 600-75 (Draft), "Per-
sonnel-General, ,Captured or Detained Unhed S~a.tes ,Army·:.Per-~onne1
Administration, ·Return, a,nd Processing.," Washi·n,gton: 3 July 19q~.
(FOR
,
OFFICIAL US.E ONLY).'
" . ,
US Department .of the, Army. Offi ce ,of the Provos t ,Marshal General.
"Collection, Collation, ,and Evaluation of Information ~ertairi;ng to
Repatri ated Uni ted States Army Pri soners of the Korean War'!. ('ASGI
File ,350.055). Washington: ,undated.' (CONFIDENTIAL) ..
us
US Department of the Army. Office ·of the Provost.Marsh~l·,Genera1.

II Repor~ 'of ,Confe.rences wi th Repat.r:i ated POW Personnel,' Med; ca 1
Corps, US Army" (ACSI File.350.055). Washington:, 4 Febr.uary 1954.

( GONFI ~~NTI AL).- .
US Department of 1;he Army. United. Stat~s Army Inte1,ligence',Com-
mand.'· Prisoners of War. 'Debri'efing~P'lan;: OPLAN" 107-71:, ~GRESS
REGAP'7~rmy. FQrt,'Hol.abird, , Ma'rYl and: 26 April- 1971. (CONFI-
DENTIAn. '17 -Apr-2009
This document has
2009
US Depar~nt of the Anny .• War Crimes Division, ,Judge AdYocate'
Section, Korean Comnunitatlons Zone.' Final t:li,storica1 and Opera=-
tional Report. APO 234~' 31 May' 1~54. (CONFlDENTIAll..
US Departmen~ of Defense. Commander, Uni ted States Mi.l i tary' As-
sistance COll1llander. Vietnam .. Operation Phn No •. J190 (Repatri-
ation'of US Prisoners of War) (U) (EGRES RECAP). APO San'
Fr~ncisc:o: 13 January 1~70. (CONFl.DENTIAI,.). .
US Department ,of Defense. Deputy S~cretary of Defense; Memoran~um
to ~he.Service·s Secretaries ~nd to ,the Chainnan, Joint Chiefs of
Staff: 8 June 1~68. (CONFIDENTIAL).
US Dep~rtme~t of Defen$e. Deputy Secretary of Defense. Memorandum
to the Services ·Sec,retaries and .to the ChainnaF:l. Joint Chiefs of
Staff. 30 November 1968. (CONFIDENTIAt). '
US Depart~nt of Defense. Deputy Secreta·ry of Defense. Memorandum
to the Services Secr.etaries and to the Chairman. Joint Chi·efs of
Staff. 1~ January 1969. (CONFIDENTIAL).
US Department of Defense, Intelligence Information Report,of the
Debriefing of Capt~in Joe Carpenter .(USAF). Washington. (SECRET).
US Department of the Navy. Fleet Airborne 'E1ectronics'Training
Unit, Pacific. IINorth Vietnam.Policy Toward 'US PW1s," SERE'
Newsletter No. 29. San Diego~ California:· June 1969. (SECRET).
'US Department Of ~he Navy, Fleet Airborne E1ectrpn;c~ Training'
Unit, Pacific. ' liThe ·Pueol0 Incident;" SE.RE Newsletter ,No,' 3D.
San Di ego. ~a 1i forn; a: March HOQ. (SECRET) •,
US Department·of the.Navy. Fleet Airborne Electronics Training
Unit, Pacific. liThe Vi·et Cong Captivity -of 'SGTs Pitzer, Johnson
and Jack,son,1I .SERE News1etter'No. 26. 'San Diego', California: )
Augus~ 1968. (SECRET). .. ,., /
US Departmen~ of the Navy. Fleet A;rborne Electronics ,Tra1rying f
Unit. Pacific .. "Viet Cong'·.Policy and Treatment of Prisaners of .
War." SERE Newsletter No. 28. 'San Diego, Californ;a:, April 1969.
(SECRET). . " , )
US Department of the N~vy. Headquart~rs, United States M~rine Corps.
Marine Corps Order 03461.1, EGRESS RECAP-Marine. Washington:
17-Apr.. 2009 19 February 1970. (CONFID~NTIAL). .
This document has
been declassifi~d lAW
Army letter dated March 5,2009 0-15
US Department of the Navy. 'Offi-ce af. ~he Chi.~f of Naval Ope.rati ons.
EGRESS RECAP-:~avy' ... ·.W~shiR·gton: 8 'M~ 1969.' ··(CONFID~NTlAL).
US Department of the Navy. Off; ce of the Chi e,f of N.ava 1 'Operati on~.
Naval. Intelligente CQI1lJI1il~d. ,lIS unrlliiry 'Report\of tt Frishman~s ex-
periences ,in .North ~ietnam.", W~shin.gton:,'?4 September 1969. (SE..,
CRE'f NO FC RN ) • .. ,
US Department of the Nqvy. Off; ce of the Chi ef of Nava 1 Opera-, "

tions, Naval Intelligence Cbmmand. ' "Sunvnary Report of LTJG '
Matheny's Experi ences ; n North Vi etnam. .. Wash'i ngt6n:' 21 June
1968. (SECRET NOFORN). ' ," . .
US Department clf th'e ~avy. uUnderAttack', ~he Mi 1i tary Code of·
Conduct," SERE Today; Vel 1, No 4, -September 1970. (FOR OF-
fJ.CIAl ~SE, ONLY). - " "
17-Apr-2009
This document has
0-16
APPENDIX E
, DISTRIBUTION
',ADDRESSEE, " ' , ., 'COPIES
Complete . Basi c . Executive
Report . Package Summary
HQ, USACDC
. Scientific 'Advisor 1
Study and An,alysis Advisor 1
DCS of Operations 1
Presentati on' Branch 1
Off; ce' of Li ai son·Act; vi ti es 1
USAF rac LO' 1
USMC LO 1
USASA LO 1
Oir of Concepts &Doctrine 2
Di·r of Materiel Systems 1
Dir of'Organization 1.
,Oir. of Test· and Eval .,
Plans, OP~t &Training Division 1
.Security Division 1
library 1
Di r of' Mgt', .Info Systems 1
Office of the 'Comptroller 1
Inspector General 1
Judge· Advocate 1
USACDC Subardi nate '.Acti vi ti es
. Combat, ·Systems Group 1
Annor, Agency 1
Field Artillery Agency 1.
Aviati0n Ag~ncy 1
I~fantry Agency 1
Engineer Agency 1
Air.:Defense 'Agency 1
CBR Agency 1
Military' Police Agency 1
Intelligence & Control 'Systems Group' 1
Communications/Electronics Agency 1
'Intelligence Agency" 2
Personnel &.Logistics, Systems Group 1
Chaplain Agency '. 1
Judge· Advocate Agency. . . 1
:Maintenance Agency 1
Medic~l Service Agency
Per~ &Admin S~rvi(Zes Agency' ~ 17-Apr-2009
This document has
E-l
EO 12958, as ~mended,
per
Army letter dated '''''arch 5,
2009
'.. Camp 1ete. • Bast-c- " Executive'
Report···· Package; Summary
..
.' Sup~ly. Agency 1
Transportat'i on· Agency 1.
.Con<zepts & For,ce Design~ Group 2
, Nuclear Agency .' L
Experimentat~on ·. Cotmland "" 1
S1,:rategic .. Stud·iesdnst·itute.: .. I 1.
... ; . Syste\11s:-Anii~ysi s"Group . '..: 1
Combat. .Syst$ms·'. Group-East' (Prev). 1
"
USACDC'Lia;son Officer
USA Europe . ' 1
USA Pacific 1
USA Alaska 1
,.USA Vietnam 1
, LO Eighth US Army Korea 1
tONARC ' 1.
USA Elec Comd 1
,USA Missile.Cemd. 1
USA Tank.AutQmotive, CQmd 1
" USA Manitions Comd 1
USA Test &Evaluation Comd 1.
USA"Avi ation Systems Comd ' 1
., U~A. Weapons.Comd, " 1
USA. Tacti,.ca:l ,AH'·. Warfare ComE:i;,;. .1
, DA; Pentagon . . 1
USAF Aerenautic~l Sys,tems·Division· . 1
.USACDC Coord Ofnce MASSTER;' . : 1
USA STRArCOM :. 1
'USAF Armament Lab ;, 1
Army' Commands
. ·CG ·US CeNARC : . :25' .' ;",,;. ~;'<':; ~ :: ~ ;'~;~.;~z;;~ :f~<:.~i::·:i .~;{~ ~.: ;~~;~~;:.:~j;:
. CINe ARSTRIKE ~ . 17-A'pr:2009 ,........:: .";'- ';'.~:
.' CG USAMC
CG USARADCOM 1 This document has
CG. USARAL 1 been declassified
.CG ,USASA . 1
. CG USATEcm~ ,. lAW
·CG USAECO~" (AMSEL;..R~- T) 1 EO 12958, as
. CI'NC USAREUR. .
CIN.C USARPAC
~. amended, per
.COfliUSARSO .. ' 3 Army letter dated
CG USARV 3 March 5, 2009
CG USACSC, 1
. .
"
E-2
'1_ •
" .
Complete" " Basic Executive
Report, Package'i .' Summary
HQDA, Staff
DCS/PERSONNEL 1
, DCS/MILITARY OPE~TIONS 1
DeS/LOGISTICS 1
,ASST:CofS/INTElLIGENCE " 1
-:. ., ASST',CofS/FOR~E DEV 2,
THE ADJUTANT'GENERAl i .~ 1
.."
THE SURGEON 'GENERAL 1
THE ,PROVOST MARSHAL GENERAL' 1'
:0, :
THE 'JUDGE ,ADVOCATE GENERAL',' 1
CHIEF, OFFICE OF PERS OPNS ' ' 1
'CHIEF, RESEARCH &'DEVELOPMENTS :,,' "
1
CHIEF OF INFORMATION 1
Other Activities :~,

HQ, USA, INTELLIGENCE 'COMMAND. 1
DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE' AGENCY,; ,1
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE' AGENCY 1 ' '
CG:,'MARINE' CORPS 'DEV&ED COMD -, 1
, COMDT AFSC 1
COMD'f. C&G'SC 1
17-Apr-2009
This document has
, been declassified lAW
EO 12958, as amended, per ,
APPEtiDIX F
( U) t1ETHOOOLOGY
~ 1. INTRODUCTION:
a. The purpose of the study as prescri bed by the study di recti ve
is to develop proposed joint and Army doctrine for captured/detained
U.S. military personnel applicable to both peace and wartime situations
including all levels and intensities of conflict.
b. In fulfilling its role for formulating doctrine, the Army is
responsive to the direction and guidance of qepartment of Defense.
'Tems of reference for the Army in the area of captured/detai ned U.S.
~ilitary personnel are also constraints, for Army doctrine is
constrained and guided by national and DOD policies, the ~eneva
Convention reTative to Prisoners of Har (GP~~), the Code of Conduct for
Uniformed Members of the Armed Forces, and applicable Joint Service
regulations, memoranda, and field manuals.
2. t~AJOR TASKS:
a. S:yoth:e.si~e,;·al1 current policies and procedures pertaining to
captured/detai'ned U.S •. military personnel at national, Department of.
Defense., and military service levels.
b. Collate, synthesize, and analyze pertinent data concerning the"'--' .. -
poll ci es, processing, treatment, and methods 'of exploi tat10n of captured!
detained U.S. milita·ry personnel by unfriendly foreign pm'lers, s~cifi-"
cally addressing Uorth Korea, North Vietnam, and the Vi et Congo '
c. Determi ne. the :adeq-uacy of current doctri ne and procedures.
d. Develop new/ rev; sed recolTllEnded doctr; ne and procedures, whe·re
required, in the following specific areas: .
(1) During training and prior to internment.
.. (2) During" internment •
(3) During pastinternment.
3. DATA COLLECTION. The data collection effort centena~.~ 'synthe-
sizi.ng curren~ U.S. policies and procedures and identifying Conrnunist
PW management principles.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
F-l
2009
a~ Synthesizing Current u.s. Policies and Procedures. Data ~/ere
collected for the three phases of the study as follows:
(1) Pre-Internment. During pre-internment the sol di er ;-s ,
taught ~/hat to expect if he ; s captured' and how he is to respond to
the treatment he receives. Data collection for this p'hase focused on
individual and unit tr.aining, the Code of Conduct, ana, other Services
training. f10re specifically, information was acquired in regard to·
types of trai ni ng being presented, the substance, level s 'a,t whi.ch i,t
was conducted, intensity, number of hours, scope, and frequency of
presentation. The training methods, techniques, and procedures employed
by other Services were reviewed for possible incorporation into Army·
doctrine and training programs. With regard to the Code of Conduct,
information was acquired on its developmental history; ,its purpose; ,
its meaning to the different service,s and to different individua,ls of.:·
the same service; the methods used by the Army and other Services for
training in the Code; the interpretation of var,ious Articles of. the
Code at DOD, DA, CONARC, and by recent repatriates and basic, train- ,
ing graduates; and the identification of facets of the Code that are
not clearly understood or are frequently misinterpreted. Data on
the Code were not assembled for the purpose of determining Code ade-
quacy.-that is a function of DOD. The primary requirement in this study was
to assemble data that would contribute to the development of Army doc-
trine for implementing the Code. .
(2) ~nternment. This phase of the study deals not with what
is requi red of the sol dier duri ng i nt~rnment but with whatthe Army is
to do for him and his family. Conduct of the USPW is governed largely
by the training he receives 'during the pre-internm~nt phase. Data
collection for the internment phase revolved around acquisition of
information in regarEl to current Ua'tional, DOD, and DA policies and
procedures for providing assistance to famit~es of captured/detained
U.S. nrilitary personnel. Also assembled was information on the means
by which the Army acquires intelligence in regard to the USPI4. There
is an evident connection between data requirements of the internment
and pre-internment phases. Even though family assistance will not be
required except under internment conditions. the, pre-internment phase
represents the Army,l s sole opportunity to inform th'e soldier of the
procedures that exist for assisting his family if he is captured.
,(3) Postin.ternment~ This phase deals ,with action that is
required by all elel1'ents of the Army in the return of USPN's to U.S.
control: their evacuation and processing. debriefing. medical treat-
ment, and rehabilitation. Data requirements existed for~ historical
17-Apr-2009
This document has
F-2 EO 12958, as amended, per
decumentation of what has been done in this area in the current and
all previous anned conflicts of the United States; current National t
DOD. and DA policies; legal, medical, and personal problems en-
countered by repatriates; short- and long-range needs of repatriates;
intelligence needs of the Army; and ,the role of each Army elerrent in
the repatriation and rehabilitation process. Especially germane to the
postlnternment phase was the acquisition of data which revealed the
conflicts am:>ng Arl11.Y requirements for intelligence, the maintenance of
high priority attention to the personal welfare of the repatriate, and
the Army role in fulfilling the requirements of military justice.
Data were acquired concerning conditions under which Article 31 of the
UCt~ must be read and explained to the repatriate; the degree of
medical attention he is to'receive at each step in the process; hO\,I
long a repatriate may be retained at each)ntermediate point in the
processing; whether medical-:;, intel1igence,C or legal personnel have
priority needs;' the nature and type of escorts selected to accompany
the repatri ate to CONUS; the nature and geographical locati on of hos-
pitals selected for repatriates; the policies for repatriates to be
interviewed by the press; and existing policies and procedures for
establishing contact and reuniting repatriates with their families.
b. Identifying Communist t1anagement Principleso The principles
employed by the Communists against captured/detained U.S. military
personnel are the heart of the ~tudy. It is against these principles
that both Army qoctrine and national policy must be applied. In a true
sense, they might be termed the threat, for they are a threat to the
life of'every U.S. soldier subjected to them. To identify the Communist
managemen,t principles. it 'was necessary to acqui re the following dat~:
(1) The lessons of history as evidenced by Soviet practices
during World War II, USPU treatment 'during the Korean \"Iar, the
experiences af USPlI's in North Vietnam and \,/ith the Viet Cong in South
Vietnam, and USPH (Pueblo detainees) trp.atmF!nt by florth Koreans after
the Korean ~Iar.
(2) The methods of the Communi sts ; nc1 ude: facil i ti es and
'location" organization and personnel. control measures and regulations,
medical and sanitation provisions and procedures, prison routine, and
prison welfare. .
(3), The role of 1nte'rrogation as employed by the Communists
includes: the objectives of -interrogation; the personnel perfonning
the interrogat1on functions, their status and training; the facilities
17-Apr-2009
This document has
F-3
and equipment used' ,~n 't'he process; the techniques and proc:edures '
employed in interrogation; and the duration and frequency of interroga-
tion sessions. "
(4) The role 'of indoctrination as it is e,mployed by :the -,
Communi s ts, i ncl ud1 ng: '; ts objecti ves, themes. durati on, and
frequency; the types of personnel charged wi~ administering
indoctrination, their status-and their training; the facilities and.
special equipment used in the indoctrination process; and the tech- )
niques and procedures of the process.
(5) Exploitation as it is employed, inciuding: the purpose,
scope, and objectives; the passive and active measures used by the
Communist; the rationale which the Communists offer for i~ uS,e; the
effect it hils upon the USPH; the legal aspects under the Geneva
Convention; how it is aodressed by the Code of Conduct; and the roles,
of propaganda, physical persuasion, mental anguish, isolation, 'anti
depri vat; on. '
4. DATA SOURCES. The follovling sources were used to acquire input and!
or to develop information for input to ,the study:
a. Literature. These sources included the Defense Documentation
Center (DOC); the Army Study Documentation and Information Retrieval
System (ASDI RS); Battelle r,1emori a1 Institu'te; ACSI Intell; gence Docu-
ment Branch; the Army Study Program; Office of the Surgeon General '
(OTSG); Office of Provost '·1arshal General (OTPt1G); Office of the Chi~f,
of t,1i1itary Histo'ry; Chief of Infonnation (CINFO); DA; and Commander~
US r,1ilitary Assistance Command, Vietnam (corms 11ACV).
b. Input from Other Military Services. The acquisition of input
from the other Services was fac,i1itated by requesting assistance ,through
the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Liaison Officers at the US Army John F.
Kennedy Center for 1~11 itary Assistance (USAJFKCt1A). Particularly
vital input came in the nature of the Air Force and tlavy contributions
in regard to Survival, Evasion, Recovery and Escape (SERE) training and
postinternment Operations Plans. rhe Special Assistant to the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for ~1anpower and Reserve Affai rs and the PW/'1I~
Action Task Group under the Assistant Secretary of Defense (International
Security Affairs) were contacted for documentation concerning policy
matters on PW's and for general information on prisoner of war affairs.
Co Input from Army Staff and Activities. All elements of the
ArmY believed to have knowledge. interest, or expertise in the subject
17-Apr-2009
This document has
F-4' EO 12958, as amended, per
. ,
area were brought int~ the planning ~nd dectsion making proce~~. ' CO'n-
siderable interest ,was ,promoted by cont~'ct1ng.applieable sources
through correspondence and by· liaison visits, by inviting and encourag-
ing attendance ,at In-Process Reviews, and by actively soliciting data
gathering assistance from all parties. Anny staff and activities '
providing input, were Headquarters CDC, Fort Belvoir, Virginia;. USACDC
Intelli gence ,Agency, fort Hola~1rd, ~~aryland; USACDC.Judge Adv,ocate
Agency~ CharlottesvilJe, Virg1nia; USACDC t1edical Service Agency,
Fort Sam' Houston, Texas; USA CDC Personnel and Administra~ive Services
Agellcy't. Fort Berijami n Harri son, Ind; ana; Offi ce of the Provost r1arsha 1
General, Forrestal Building, Hasnington, DC; Office of the Adjutant'
General, Casualty Branch, Forrestal Building; Washington, DC; Office
of the:·;<;bief of Information, Cormnunist Relations Branch, Pentagon, .
~Was hi n~on, D~, "Off; c;e of ··ttie Chi ef :of.. Suppo~t. Servi ces " Pentagon ,.
\~ashir:l'gt.on, DC; and Assistant Chi ef of"S'taff for Intell i genee, Penta~on,
Washi'fi'g!l!on, DC. " .",,', .
" .
d. Debri efings 0 Fi rst hand know~edge was acqui red from debrief-
ing reports of recent repatriates. ACSI provided these reports.
e.' Interviews. 'In those cases where debriefing repo-rts failed
tQ 'provide elements of information needed by the study, arrangemeRts
were made to interview the repatriates, either by bringing the re-
turnee to the study team or by a study team member traveling to the
resident location of the returnee. The interviews were designeq to
determine the nature, scope, and intensity of training received by
Anny personnel. A mass interview technique was employed at an Army
trafning center, with an active Army division,and with a US Artily
Special Forces Gro~p, a specially trained unit. '
f. ,Questionnaire. In' ~ome cases, time and 'expense precluded'
personal interviews. Questionnaires were devised to obtain necessary
data in such cases. These ouestionnaires were forwarded to former
PW's for review and'response. Each question was word~d in s~ch:a
manne r as to e 11 ci t an aff; rmati ve or. negati ve ans\'/er, there~y"
facilitating the process of evaluating results.
~o' DEVELOPt~ENTAL STEPS. Stated in its simplest form, the: purpose
of this study is t<?' identify. inadequacies of current doctrine in the
. area of captured/detained US military personnel and to formulate
recolTll1!'nded doctri ne to resolve those i nadequaci es. Deve 1opmen t of
.. th'e study invol ved the follOWing steps:
a. Id~ntification of the Communist principles and techniques
that will be employed against captured/detained military personnel
in, the 1972-75 tine frame~·. '17-Apr-2009
This document has
. F-5 EO 12958, as amended, per
2009
· ,
'b. Identification of doctrinal requirements for countering
Communist pr1ncipl es ,and techn; ques. .
c. Identification of current policies and procedures of
Department of Defense and higher levels of gov~rnment, hereinaft~r
identified as National and DOD policy.
d. Identification of doctrinal requirements evolving from
National and DOD policies.
e. Synthesis of existing US Army doctrine for the USPH in the
pre-i nternment phase. Topics addressed were US Army .doctri ne as it
applies to Individual, Advanced Individual, and Unit training and
the degree to which the individual soldier is prepared for the
psychological stresses of an internment environment., Specific areas
reviewed in the pre-internment phase were: Code of Conduct, Geneva
and Hague Conventions, First Aid, Physical Conditioni.ng, and Survival,
Evasion, and Escape t.raining.
f. Synthesis of US Army doctrine as it relates to the, internment
phase. Topics addressed were procedures for n,ot1fying the immediate
family that a soldier is in t1IA or P\oS status, policy for rele,asing
infonnation concerning P,Jls, personnel actions 1n regard to ,a. soldier
while he is a PW, ArfI'\Y provisions .for family assistance, and prQ-
"",. cedures for co1lection and dissemination of intellig.efliee·-in.':r.egard"
to captured/deta; ne.d soldiers. .
g. Synth'esi.s'of US Army doctrine as it relates to the po'stintern-
ment phase. Topics addressed were evacuation and personnel processing
procedures, debriefing proced~res, rehabilitation of the re~urnee,
intelligence collection, legal aspects wi-th r~ard to behavior while
interned, and information release. \ ' :
h. Determining the adequacy of current doctrine in the areas of
pre-internment~ internment, and postinternment (6d, e, and f, above)
by comparing it against the requirements generated by Communist man-
agement princ1 ples (6a and b, above), and requi rements imposed by .
r~ational and DOD policy (6c, above).
i. Identifying specific doctrinal voids and/or inconsistencies

that evolved during the comparative analysis.
j. Analytically deriving feasible solutions to each requi·r.'ef!l8nt.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
k. Recommending doctrin~ for filling each void or correctin~
identified deficiencies.
6. ANALYTIC TECHNIQUES (SEE FIGURE 29 on page F-9):
a. The methodology consisted mainly of a synthesis of existing
doctrine and comparatively analyzing it against requirements generated
by national policy and Commurist prisoner Of war management
principles. The output-of ~e comparative analysis provided two
important criteria: (1) req,uirements that are satisfied by existing
doctrine and (2) those requirements which can be resolved only by
the formulation of new doctr~ne, or by revising the old.
b. The Communist management principles- constitute what in most
studies is idehtified as the' "Threat." Together with U.S. rlational
policy. they represent requirements against which Army doctrine is
compared for determination ~f adequacy_ Once the national policies
and the Communist management principles had been identified, the
next step Of the study focusjed on the synthes i s of e~i.sti ng doctri ne
and its categorization into the three phases which the doctrinal
analysis had addressed: Pre.-internment, Internment, and Postinternment.
(1) Pre-intemment:
(a) Unit trai n:i ng.
(b) Code of Copduct training.
(c) SERE-rela~d training.
(2)· Internment: Family ass i s ta.nce meas ures.
(3) ·Postintemment:
(a) Evacuation and processing of the returnees.
(b) Debri efi ng procedures.
(c) Medical tr,eatment of repatri ates.
(d) Rehabilitation.
t
c. After completion of b, above, existing doctrine arid current
implementation procedures we,re compared against the requirements
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified -lAW
2009 .
generated by Conmun1st management prin~iples and nat.lona·l policy •.
Subjective evaluations of each requirement in tems of existing
doctri ne and ; denti ri ed doctri t;\a 1. voi ds and defi ci et:l.ci es:-. These "
v0ids and deficiencies became the subject oT further research and
analysis.
do ' Each void/deficiency was analyzed for the purpose of
identifying additional data elements that might assist in resolution.
These data e 1emen ts were uqlJ:;rred th rough further 1i terature search,
interviews with knowledge~ble people, consultation with mermers of
appropri ate DOD and DA staffs or, when necessary, further study on
historical development and trends. The additional research and
analysis was approached with a view toward identification of,several
realistic alternatives for responding to the doctrinal void/
defici ency. Alternatives s'elected were requi red to be mil itarily
practical, suitable for employment in the 1972-75 time frame. re-
sponsive to national 'policy and Communist management principles, and
economically feasible. DA staff sections. organizations, and '
activities with areas af proponency or'vital interest in the study
participated in the selection of alternatives.
e. Each alternative (possible solution) was analyzed against
kno'lm constraints. Those alternatives not invalidated by the
constraints were comparatively analyzed against requirements. The
best solution was selected on the basis of qualitative evaluation
supported by sound rationaleo All DA staff sections and activities
with areas of proponency or special interest participated in the
evaluation of the solution.
f. The best solution evolving from the analysis of each void/
deficiency was structured in the form of a recommendation for doctrine
or for follow-on action.
17-Apr-2009
This docum~nt has
F-8
17-Apr-2009
This document has
Synthesis RequIre-
ments
ANALYSIS I ~ FINDINGS CON- RECOMMEN-

CLUSIONS DATIONS
I----I~IIII Current ...1

1-1_ _ _ _ _
. METHODOLOGY·
Procedures
USPOW STUDY
L-..-------i!cONSTRAINT
APPENO'lX G
(Y) DATA ,APPENDIX

-
1. This appendix contains dire'ct :response data obtained through the
device of questionnaires 'for the purpose of establishing current levels of
training and adequacy therein.
2. The following data is in~luded:
a. Annex I - CONARC Bra~ch School Responses

b. Annex II - BCT/AIT/Active Unit Questionnaire
c. ,.Annex I II - Fonner Pr.isoner of War Questi onna; re .
d. Annex IV - Basic and Advanced Officer Courses POI.
3. The CONARC branch schoo1~' responses consist of replies to a series
of questions forwarded to th~ A~'s branch sch90ls by Commanding General,
Continental A~tommand. Fqrmulated under the auspices of this study,
'the questionnaire was conce~ed ~ith SERE training and SERE-related
training in the Army. Anne~ I presents three distinct elements of in-
formation : the CON ARC qu~st~ onna; re. a CONA~C consoli dated, posi ti on,
, a'nd a study-oriented statistical analysiS.
4. Annex II consists 'of a s~~tistical display of the responses to a
-'
series of questions presented to s'everal groups of subjec.ts cur..DUlt-ly
se'rvf~g in th,e ;AmI1Y.. These,'~ample groups inc)uded mermers of BCT and AIT
students at ..f$;rt Jackson, Sa4th Carolina, and'officer and enlisted
personnel of the 82d Airbor'1~ Divfsion and of the 5th Special Forcfi!s...
Group, bQth units located at. Fort Bragg, North, Carolina. The object
of the questionnaire was to reveal the la~itu~e and depth of current
Army training in the area of doctrine far captured/detained US mili:~ary
parsonnel. The respQnses se~ved'to indicate the degre~of assimil~tion
Of the pertinent,doctrine.
,5. Annex III contributes a !}tatistica1 display of t~e responses to a
? questionnaire by repatria~q Army prisqners'of war of the Vietnqm/con-
fHct. The intent of this, 'al"!alytical instrUment was to discern the ap-
~licability and efficiency of' Army training for' the prisoner of war en-
! Viranment. Responses to th;~ questionnaire revealed evaluations tempered
by the actual e'xperi~nce of p'rison camp exis~nce.
17..Apr-2009
Thi~ document has
been, declassified lAW
G-1 Army I~tter dated ,March 5,
,2009
6. Annex IV presents a grapnic analysis of the number of hours devoted
to SERE subjects and SERE-related subjects during the various Officer
Basic Courses and Officer Advanced Courses. The purpose of this display
was to prev1de an indication of the relative depth of instruction pre-
sented in the several categories of topics. expressed as a function of
ti lIE. '
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW, ,
EO 12958" as amended, per
G-2
ANNEX I
CONTINENTAL ARMY COMMAND
BRANOi SCHOOL RESPONSES
1. On 29 January 1971, a questionnaire was forwarded to Commanding

General, Continental A~ Command for distribution to the various
branch schools. The questionnaire concerned various aspects of cur-
rent and future training in the area of doctrine for captured/detained
US military personnel.
2. Each branch school responded separate1y' and CONARC, after analysis,

consolidated the s~hools' replies and formulated its position on the
questions furnished. .
3. Attached at Inclosure a is a copy of the questionnaire. Inclosure
b represents the'conso1 i dated CONARC Response, and Inclosure c re-
presents the study consolidation of the individual bran'ch schools' re-
sponses.
Inclosures:
a. CONARC Questionnaire
b. CONARC Position
c. Consoi i dated Branch School Responses
17-Apr-2009
This document has
Army letter-dated March 5, 2009
G-I-l
Inclosure a
SERE AND SERE-RELATED- INSTRUCTION
The following represents a list of questions pertaining to Survival;

Escape, Resistance, and Evas,;on (SERE) training as it is presently being
conducted in the United States ArmY. SERE subjects are considered to
be CQde of Conduct, Geneva and Hague Conventi ons, Escape and Evasion 'and
Land Navi gati on'. SERE-rel at~d subjects are consi de red to' be Mil itary
Justice, First Aid, Field Sanitation, Personal Sanitation and Physical
Training.
~,
1. Does a requirement exist for insuring uniformity of instruction on
SERE subjects between:
a. Branches of the Army?
b. CONUS Military Posts?
c. Other Services (USAF~ USN, USMC)?
. ,
2. What is school's position on Code of Conduct instruction?

a. Haw does school interpret the precepts of the Code?
b. How does school evaluate the effectiveness of Code Instruction?
c. Does school consider present requirements for Code training
adequate? If nQt, why?
3. Is a separate' course or $chool needed for "high risk of capture"
personnel?
a. Who should have prop~nency?
b. Who shQuld administer

.. it?
~ 4. Does schaal c~msider the quanti ty and qual,ity of current SERE train-
ing adequate to properly orient the US soldier on the internment en-
vironment and to prepare him for the best chance for survival?
5. Does a requirement exist in US Army training to differentiate be-
tween internment under armed conflict conditions and peacetime detention
during periods of latent hostility?
17-Apr-2009
This document has
G-I-a-l
Army letter dated March'S, 2009·
6. Oees a requirement exist tp conduct instruction on conflicting
idealogies? If so, what shou1d be the content of instruction and at
what stage of training should it be conducted?
NOTE: Question #2a was not included in this study's analysis of the
CON ARC branch schools' responses since it demanded descriptive answers
which were not competently displayed. In addition, the numbers of the
questions in Inclosure c do not precisely correspond-to those delineated
here. '
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW'
"
Inclosure b
CON ARC POSITION
The following represents CONARC reply dated 29 April 1971 to questionnaire

forwarded to that command on 29 January 1971.
1. How is SERE and SERE-related training currently being conducted in
CONUS TO&E units?
ANSWER: SERE and SERE-related training is tau9ht in units as both unit·
and individual subjects and is accomplished ~hrough both pure and
integrated instruction as required by appropr;ate'di~ct;ves. 'Units-and
individuals are required to maintain proficiehcy in all of these subjects.
The subjects of Survival, Evasion~ and Escape, Code of Conduct, and
physical fitness testing are of special significance in that ,they are
used as training indicators for ascertaining training readiness of units
under the prov1si ons of AR 220-1, "Uni t Readi ness,. II
. The training requi relll!nts for SERE and SERE-related subjects are exp1ai ned
as fallows:
Authority and
Subject Training ,ReqUirements Supporting Publications
Cade of Conduct POR qua 1; ncati on, and as AR 350-30
required to maintain pro- AR 220-1
ficiency. To be integrated AR 612-2
as appropriate in all Anx B. CON Reg 350-1
phases of training. ASubjScd 21:..15·
Geneva & Hague POR qua 11 fi cat; on. All AR 350-216
Canventiens individuals receive 2 hours AR 612-2
formal instruction within Anx B~ CON Reg 350-1
6 weeks of entry on active ASubScd 27-1
duty and 2 hours formal
instruction annually. 17-Apr-2009
Practical training to be
integrated as appropriate This document has
in all tactical training and been declassified lAW
will be related to the' Code EO 12958,' as amended,
of Conduct. Uniform CodiiOf
r~ilitart 'Justice and Sur- per
vival, vfsion &Esca~ Army letter dated
March 5, 2009
G-I-b-1
Survival, POR qualification, and as ' AR 350-225
Evasion. and required to maintain pro~ AR 612-2
Escape ficiency. To be integ~ated AR 220-1
into all appropriate phases Anx B, CON Reg 350-1
of training. Para 4d{l), Basic CON
Reg 350-1
ASubjScd 21-12
Land Navigation. Special Emphasis subject in Anx B, CbN Reg 350-1
CONARC Training Directive. ASubjScd 5-3
Commander wi 11 determi ne ASubjScd 7-lfl
time required to maintain ASubjScd 21-40
proficiency. Integrated
with Survival, Evasion~ &
Escape.
Military Justice Course A to be given to EM AR 350-212
duri ng BCT r Course B to be Anx Bt CON Reg 350-1
gi ven each n1 upon cont> 1eti lim ASubjScd 21-10
6 months active duty and upon ASubjScd 27-2
each reenlistment. Courses
C and 0 to be given officer
personnel at the discretion
of Bn or equivalent co~
manders.
First Aicl & Annual refresher training. DA Pam 40-5
Emergency Medical Anx B, CON Reg 350-1
Treatment
Field Sanitation Special Emphasis subject in Anx B, CON Reg 350-1
&Hygiene* CON ARC Training Directive. DA Pam 40-2
C.ommander will determine time ASubjScd 21-3
required to maintain pro- ASubjScd 21-11
ficiency. Training will
emphasize operations in
prim; tf ve areas.
Physical Fitness Tests to be admi ni stered semi- AR 600-9
annually; physical fitness AR 220-1
wi 11 be emph~sized through- . Anx B, CON Reg 350-1
out trai n; n,9 programs. ' ASubjScd 21-37
* - Indicates special interest subject rather than mandatory training
requi rements.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
G-I-b-2 Army letter dated March 5, 2009
.1
2. What model is used as the target recipient for overall ArmY training?
For SERE training? < .
ANSWER: CONARC dees not recognize a model soldier for overall Army
training. The educational minimum requirements and the aptitudina1
qualifications differ for same 472 enlisted r40S as described in AR 611-
201. Additionally, DA Pamphlet 350-10 sp~cifies the prerequisites for all
Army courses of instruction which differ according to the difficulty
of the courses. SERE training is given <to a11 levels of "both officer
and enlisted courses of instruction.
3. Dees a requirement exist for insuring uniformity of instruction on
SERE subjects between:
a. Branches of the Anmy
b. CONUS Milita~y Posts
c. Other Services (USAF, USN, USMC),
ANSWER: Yes. A requir.ement exists for standardizing SERE instruction
throughout the US Armea Forces. The applications of SERE principles and
techniques should be consistent by the members of all Services to insure
optimum performance and a united front aga'nst any enemy. Uniform ap-
plication of SER[ by all personnel will inhibit the ene~'s efforts. to
play one person against another.
4. What is CONARC's position on Code of Conduct instruction?
a. How does CONARC interpret the precepts of the Code?
b. How does CONARC evaluate the. effectiveness of Code instruction?
c. Does CONARC conside.r present requirements for Code training ade-
quate? If not, why?
ANSWER: The basis of CONARC Code of Conduct instruction is AR 350-30.
DA establishes policy on PW conduct. The articles of the Code are con-
sidered to prescribe optimum behavior. The policy of this headquarters
is'nat to promote or instill in the student of CONARC schools a doubt
or negative attitude concerning a deviation from expected behavioral pat-
terns regardless of the enemi es' treatment of PW' s. A detenni nati on of
the effectiveness of Code instruction can only be made by an analysis
of the behavior of US prisoners in Southeast Asia--a determination which
cannot be made accurately until a substantial number of prisoners are
17-Apr-2009
This document has .
G-I-b-3 EO 12958, as amended, per
2009
returned to US control. Present regu; remen-ts for Code ; nstruct; on are
cons idered adequate· unti 1 Us PW debrl efi nas conc1 ude otherwise. Additional
instruction in an military sLbjects woul be benefic; a1; however, .
because pf resource limitations the amounts of Code instruction cur-
rently being taught are considered adequate when balanced. against other
equally important subjects.
5. Has a program similar to that conducted by Fleet Air Electronics
Training Unit. Pacific (FAETUPAC), North Island Naval Air Station,
San Diego, California, been reviewed as having possible application to .
US Amy "hi gh ri sk of capture" personnel? If so:
a. Who will have proponency?
b. Who will administer it?
ANSWER: Certain categories of Army personnel would benefit from addi-
tional instruction in SERE and SERE-related subjects. However, this
headquarter.s has no plans for a separate course for "hi gli riSK of capture ll
R!!rsonnel untfl""suc"h time as a definite neea is justified".

6. What is CONARC·s position an SERE instruction?
a. How does CONARC interpret the requi rements for SERE training?
b. How dGes CONARC evaluate the effectiveness of A~-wide SERE
training?
c. Does CON ARC consider'~he quantity and quality of current SERE
training'adequate to properly orient the US soldier on the internment
environment and to prepare him for the best chance for survival?
ANSWER: AR 350-225 established the requirements for Survival, Escape,
and Evasion training.• \ The CON ARC interpretation and guidance to CONARC
schools is found in Annex Q, CONARC Regulation 350-1. CONARC Regulation
350-1 lists SEE as a Common Subject, prescribes the scope for this
instruction and designates USAIS as the CONARC proponent. The answer
to the question. concerning the effectiveness, quality, and quantity
of SEE training is basically the same as for questions 4 and 5 above.
7. Does a requirement exist in US Army training to differentiate be-
tween internment under armed conflict conditions· and peacetime
detention during periods of latent. hostility? .
ANSWER: The PQss1bility exists and should be examined by the study
group of the Institl,lte for Strategic and Stability Operations" In other
17-Apr-2009
This document has
G-I-b-4 EO 12958, as amended, per
words. there are certai'n.ly differences in the level of conflict. in-
temati onal rel ations. and operat10nal envi ronment experienced by a
helicopter pilot in RVN, an Air Force pi10t on a strategic reconnaissance
mission in the Caribbean, or the crew of a. Navy ship seized by the North
Koreans. On the other hand, conditions of peace have not truly existed
since World War II; US Forces have operated or trained to operate in
environments ranging from cold to limited war. Moreover, the argue-
ment can be made that .the ene~'s treatment of US prisoners has been
substantially the same throughout the range of conflict even at the
~ lowe'r'" levels , and that therefore US personnel should be trained to behave
in a un.ifonn manner if captured. This headquarters will entertain
any_ rec'orimendatfon for change depending on the outcome of the US P~~
study.
8. Does a requirement exist to conduct instruction on conflicting
ideolegies? If so, what should be the content of instruction and at
what stage of tr-aining should conduct instruction be conducted?
ANSWER: There is no requirement in existing regulations to conduct in-
struction on conflicting ideologies. The trend in the past 2 years
has been aw~ from the concept of attempting to strengthen patriotism
by defamation of Communism. The current Command Information Program
presented to the sol di er in Advanced Ind1vi dual Training util izes such
subjects as United States Government and Freedom Under Law, The Army
In Service To The Nation, US Foreign Policy and Fo~e;gn Relations, and
Standards for Honorable Service. Instructi0n on c0nflicting ideologies
is presented to Officer Advanced Course students and at US Army Command
and General Staff Colle~. "
9. What improvements 'or additional courses could be incorporated into
US A~ training to make it a more effective instrument for instilling
patriotic ideals, faith in country, and respect for authority? .: ~
ANSWER: Individual and unit training at CONARC schools, units, and
training centers is under continuous revision. Adding additional
ceurses during this time of declining resources is not advisable. All
school courses are currently under consideration for possible elimina-
tion or consolidation. At this time, all 'Army leadership instruction
is under study by' the DA Leadership Task Group headed by BG Emerson
at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. '
10. What recommendations does'CONARC have fer SERE and SERE-related
training?
17-Apr-2009
This document has '
EO 12958, as amended, per G-I-b-5
ANSWER: The answer to this quest1an ;s answered in the answers to
questions 4, 5, and 6 above. There are no current plans for a change
to present methods of amounts af Survival, Escape, and Evasion train-
ing. Current programs are oansidered adequate. Hawever t if the results
af the US PW study reveal inadequacies, this headquarters will enter-
tain re conmen dati €Ins far change. .
17-Apr-2009
This document has
G-I-b-6
Inclosure c
CONSOLIDATED BRANCH SCHOOL ·RESPONSES
The fallowing represents a consolidation of respenses received from the
branch schools t9 eight (8) questions pertaining to SERE tra1ning. ..
1. "Does' a requirement exi,st for insuring uniformity of instruction
on SERE subjects be'bleen branches of the AnI\Y?"
SCH00LS l1?. !ill. !L.8..
". SIGNAL-DIX X
"FINANCE X
USAIMA X 17-Apr-2009
{\
X This document has
USAMMC
USACGS x EO 12958, as amended,
ARMOR X
per'
CHAPLAIN ·X Army letter dated March
ARTILLERY X 5,2009
ORDNANCE X
AVIATION X
ENGINEER X
INFANTRY X
QUARTERMASTER X
INTELLIGENCE X
AIR DEFENSE X
SIGNAL-GORDON X
CIVIL AFFAI RS X
M. P. X
HELICOPTER X
SURVEILLANCE - ELECTRONICS X
TRANSPORTATION X
.. ADJUTANT GENERAL X
G-I-c-l
- ------- . --- -- ----_.. - - - - - - - -
2. "Does a requirement exist for insuring uniformity of instruction oh

SERE subjects between CONUS mi'1i tary postS?1I
SCHOOLS
SIGNAL-DIX
-
YES
-NO
X
N.A.
FINANCE X
USAIMA X
USAMMC X
USACGS X
ARMOR X
CHAPLAIN X
ARTILLERY X
ORDNANCE X
AVIATION X
ENGINEER X
INFANTR¥ X
QUARTERMASTER X
INTELLIGENCE X
AIR DEFENSE X
SIGNAL-GORDON X
CIVIL AFFAIRS X
M. P. X
HELICOPTER X
SURVEILLANCE - ELECTRONICS X
TRANSPORTATION X
17-Apr..2009
ADJUTANT GENE RAL X This document has
EO 12958, as amended,
per
Army letter dated March
G-I-c-2 5,2009
- •....-.. -..-. ----

3. "Does a requirement exist for insuring uniformity of instruction o~
SERE subjects between Other $erv; ces?" .) ,
SCHOOLS
SIGNAL-DIX
-
YES !ill.
X
~.
FINANCE X
USAIMA X
~
USAMMC X
USACGS X
"!)
ARMOR X
CHAPLAIN X
ARTILLERY ~
oRDNAUCE ~
AVIATION X
ENGINEER X
INFANTRY X
QUARTE RMASTE R X
INTELLIGENCE X
AIR DEFENSE X
SIGNAL-GORDON X
CIVIL AFFAIRS )(
M. P. X
HELICOPTER X
~:
SURVEILLANCE X
TRANSPORTATION X
ir
AOJ UT ANT GENE RAL X
17-Apr-2009
This document has
Army letter dated March 5, 2009 G-I-c-3
4. II Dees school c~ms i der SERE trai ni ng to be adequate?"
SCHOOLS YES NO gUALI FlED YES QUALIFIED NO N.A.
TRANSPORTATION X
SURVEILLANCE-
ELECTRONICS X
HELICOPTER X
M. Po X
CIVIL AFFAIRS X
51 GNAL-GORDON X
AI R DEFENSE X
INTELLIGENCE X
QUARTE RMASTE R X
INFANTRY X
ENGINEER X
AVIATION X
ORDNANCE X
ARTILLERY X
CHAPLAIN X
AOOR X
us ACGS X
USAIMA X
MISSILE - MUNITIONS X
FINANCE X 17-Apr-2009
SIGNAL - MONMOUTH X
This document has
2009
G-I-c-4
• . -.--
-5. !lDoes a requirement exist in US Amy training to differentiate between
internment under armed conflict conditions and peacetime detention during
periods of latent hostility?"
SOiOOLS
TRANSPORTATI ON
-YES QUALIFIED YES QUALIFIED NO N.A.
SURVEILLANCE-
ELECTRONICS X
HELICOPTER X
M. P. X
CIVIL AFFAIRS x
SIGNAL-GORDON X
AIR DEFENSE X
INTELtIGENCE X
QUARTERMASTER X
INFANTRY X
ENGINEER x
AVIATION x
ORDNANCE X
ARTILLERY x
CHAPLAIN X
ARMOR x
17-Apr-2009
USACGS x This document has
USAIMA X been declassified lAW
MISSILE - MUNITIONS X EO 12958, as amended,
per
FINANCE X Army letter dated March 5,
SIGNAL - MONMOUTH X 2009
• G-I-c-5
•
6. "Does a reC:luirement exist to can duct in~truction on conf1icictfn~ 1aeo-
1ogi es?"
SCHOOLS.. gUALIFIED YES gUALIFIED NO ~

-YES NO
TRANSPORTATION x
SURVEILLANCE-
ELECTRONICS x
HELICOPTER X
M. P. x
CIVIL AFFAIRS X
SIGNAL-GORDON x
AIR DEFENSE x
INTELLIGENCE X
QUARTE RMASTE R x
INFANTRY X
ENGINEER X
AVIATION x
ORDNANCE X
ARTILLERY X
CHAPLAIN X'
ARMOR X
USACGS x
USAIMA X
MISSILE - MUNITIONS X •
SI~AL - r~ONMOUTH X
This document has
2009
G-I-c-6
• --
7. "How does your school evaluate the effectiveness of the Code
instruct; on1"
LESS THAN
SCHOOLS. GOOD ADEQUAT~ ADEQUATE POOR N.-A.
ADJUTANT GENERAL X
TRANSPORTATION X
SURVEILLANCE-
ELECTRONICS . X
.- HELICOPTER X
MILITARY POLICE X
CIVIL AFFAIRS X
SIGNAL-GORDON X.
AIR DEFEMSE X
INTEllIGENCE X
QUARTERMASTER X·
INFANTRY X
ENGINEER X'
AVIATION. X
ORDNANCE X
ARTILLER.Y . X
CHAPLAIN X
'~
ARMOR X
USACGS' X
i-:
USAlMA X
MISSLE-MUNITION X
FINANCE X
SIGNAL-MONMOUTH X
17-Apr-2009
This document has G.,.I-c-7.
• •
B. IIOoes the school consider present requi rements for'Code trainin9
adequate?"
ADEQUATE WITH
SCHOOLS ' ADEgUATE NO!, .,ADEgUATE
-,'
N.A. RESERVATIONS
ADJUTANT GENERAL X
TRANS PO RT AT! ON X
SURVE ILLANCE-
ELECTRONICS X
HELICOPTER X
M. P. X
CIVIL AFFAIRS X
SIGNAL-GORDON X
AIR DEFENSE X
INTELLIGENCE X
QUARTERMASTER X
INFANTRY X
ENGINEER X
AVIATION X
ORDNANCE X
ARTILLERY X
CHAnAIN
ARMOR X
X
,
,
\
\
\
USACGS X
, .
USAIMA X
MISSILE X
SIGNAL - MONMOUTH X
This document has
G-I-c.:.8
• ANNEX II
•
BCT/AIT/ACTIVE UNIT QUESTIONNAIRE
1. The data provided in the following sectien were collected from three
sources:
a. Trainees at Fort Jackson, South Carolina.
b. Enlisted flen and officers from the 82d Airborne Division, Fort
Bra~g, North Carolina.
c. Enlisted'men and officers from· the 5th Special Forces Group,
Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
~. The attached questionnaire provides examples of the questions tnat
were addressed to these three sources. The responses are provided, in
percentages, for five, groups within the three- source eleflents. These'
five groups were de 1i n!! ate d as fo 11 ows :
a. Trainees from Fort Jackson, South Carolina.
b. Enlisted men within the 82d Airborne Division.
c. Officers within the 82d Airborne Division.
d. En1isted.men within the 5th Special Forces Group.
e. Officers within the 5th S~ecia1 Forces Group.
3. A comnent ; s demanded concerning the s iZ~ of: the sampl es for .thd d~oups"
defined above. All samples are small. This small' sample ,size was'J..;' "
function of the limited tili1e available and the problems inherent irii\'~' ;
locating and obtaining soldiers for partici'pat1on. The data are viewed .
as providing indications of the degree to which the respective Igroup,S": .
assimilated the information relevant to the Questions employed; however"
it must be stressed that'the data are not p~ovided in the con~xt of a
sophisticated program implemented to provide statistically significant
,ii' results. The compOSition of the samples is provided below: I
a. Fort Jackson BCT, AIT trainees: n = 104 ,

b. Fort Bragg, 82,d AirbC?rne Division:.
(1) Enlisted: n = 29
17-Apr-2009
(2) Officer: n = 17 This document has
EO 12958, as amended,
per
G-II .. ' Army'letter dated March
5, 2009 .
C• . F0rt Bragg, 5th Special Forces Group:
(1) Enlisted: n = 33
(2) Off; cer: n = 11
4. Interviews of the Fort Jackson AIT and BeT trainees were· hel d on 6,
and 7 April 1971. The 82d Airborne Division interviews were conducted on
30 June 1971 and th~ interviews of the Special Forces personnel on 7
July 1971.
S. All officers interViewed were of the rank of Captain or below. All
enlisted men were E7 or below. No selection was made on the basis of
military or civilian occupational specialization and none of the pro-
spective interview~es were rejected for any reason... '
6. The duration of the interviews averaged twenty-five minutes in dura-
tion. When possible, interviews were conducted individually; however, at
times seyeral were interviewed at the same time as necessitated by the
time avail ab leo
17..Apr..2009
This document has
, been declassified lAW .
G-II-2
'!.
• . -CO!1lPOS i,te 5tatisti cs
Fort Jackson 82d Abn Di v Seecia1 Forces

EM Officers
AIT/BCT
-EM Offi'cers
1. How many articles are .

in the Code of Conduct?
Correct 20~ 03% ' 76% 36% . 09%
.;
In,correct 80% 97% 23% 64% 91%
~
2. In your own words could
yau state what one of these
articles is?
Correct 15% 03% 53% 45% 36%
Incorrect 85% 97% 47% - 55% 64%
3. Were you' instructed to

gi ve to the enelllY ~ the
"Big 4" (name, ran , seri a1
nurmer and D08)?
Yes 98% 100%- , 100% . 90% 91%
No ()2% 00% 00% 10% 09%
4. , Were you instructed to
90 beyond the "Big 411 in
order to "evade" answeri n!!.l
questions?
Yes 18% 17% 06% '12% 36%
NQ 82% 83% 94% 88% 63%
5. ~h~t do you understand
by the sentence: . II I wi 11
• 'i evade answering further
questions to the utmost
of my abi1Hy."?
.iJ Adequate 12% 00% 00% 00% 03%
Inadequate 88% 100% 100% 100% 97%
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per G~II-3
• Fort Jackson
AIT/BeT
•
82d Abn Div Seed a 1 Forces
EM Off; cers
-EM Offi cers
6. Article V of the Code
of Conduct states that a
pr; soner wi 11 "evade" answer-
ing questions (other than to
give his name, rank, ser-
vice number and date of birth)
to "the utmost of his ability.1I
Answer "yes" or "no" accord-
ing to your own understanding
of Article V:
a. A PW may not under
any c; rcumstances di vul ge more
than his name, rank, service
nunber, and date of birth.
Yes 87% 55% 59% 67% 77%
No 13% 45% 41% 33% ?3%
b. A prisener should
resist giving additional in-
formation up to the point of
physical mistre~tment at the
hands .of his captors.
Yes 46% 44% 59% 45%
No 54% 56% 41% 55%
c. A prisener should re-
sist briefly and then lie in
order to confuse and harass
the enemy •.
Yes 35% 45% 18% 10% 06%
65% 55% 82% 9b% 94%
d. A prisoner should
resist up until the point 17-Apr-2009
when resistance is no longer
possible. He should then This document has
2009
G-II-4
- '.
Fort Jackson
AITLBCT
~
82d Abn Div
EM Offi cers
S2e ci a1 Forces
EM Off; cers
g1 ve truthful answers to
whatever questions h'e can
no longer avoid answering.
Yes 20% 14% 18% 24% 09%
No 80% . 86% 82% 76% 91%
,~
7. Are US mi litary personnel

pe rmi tte d to fi 11 out the
~. Red Cross IICapture Card ,II
although the information re-
quired 'gees beyond name.
rank, service number and
date of bi rth:
Yes 29% 28% 18% 21% 09%
No 71% 72% 82% 79% 91%
8. Were you instructed
in methods ta resist inter-
ragation and indoctrina-
ti on other than dependence
upon name, rank, service
number and date of birth?
Yes 15% 18% 24% 51% : 55%
No 85% 82% 76% 49% 45%
9. Are the following ac-
tions violations of the Code?
a. Statemnts made by
PW's that the enelq)' treats
PW's well.
l!.
Yes 64% 52% 47% 69% . 45%
., No 36% 48% 53% 31% 55%
,17 -Apr-2009
This docunlent has
EO 12958, as amended, per .'
Army'letter dated March 5, 2009 G-II-5

--- - - ._-- -.- --.-.-- ------ --_ .
- Fort ,Jackson
•
82d Abn Div'
EM Officers
Seeci a1 Forces,
EM Officers
An/Bct
b. Stat~ments by USPW's
that the war is unjust and
shou1~ ~e ended.
Yes 65% 59% 88% 81% ' 82%
, No 35% ',41% 12% 19% 18% '
c. Television or film
appearances in whi'th USPW' s
which express a ~es;re for
an inm~di ate end, to the fi ght-
ing •.
Yes 67% 48% 94% '88% 73%
No 33% 52% 06% 12% ' 27%
d. Discussion with ~n
interrogatpr/in~o~tr;n~tor
about the merits of,capitalism
versus Communism.
Yes 60%, 65% 55% " 70% 65%
No 67% 66% JOO% 67% 91%
e. Discussing intern-
ment conditions and camp
administration with :the enemy.
Yes' 33% 34% 00% 33%, 09%
No 67% 66% 100% 67% 91%
10. C.n Y04,be punished for
not 1hi ng up to the Code, of
Conqu~t? - '
Yes 94% 83% 88% 63% 1,00%
No 06% 17% 1,2% 37% 00%
11. Why should a PW live up
to the ,Code? '
Because he can be punished. 36% 06% 02% 15% 02%
Because i 1; ; s a good s,tanq-
~rd for cQnd~ct. . 36% 36% 40% . 20% 30%
Bec~use it is expected qf
a US s~rviceman. 66% 42% 60% 35% 40% .
17-Apr-2009
This document has G-II-6
EO 12958, as amended, per·
Army letter dated March S, 2009
• Fort Jackson
•
82d Abn 01v Seec; a1 Forces
EM Off; cers
,
AIl/BeT
-
EM Officers
12. What techniques wou1d be
used against you by an enemy
i nterrogator/i ndoctri nator?
Adequate 10% 17% 41% 03% 27%
Inadequate 90% 83% 59% 97% 73%
-,
13. Based pn your training,
what are you permitted to
~.
say to yaur captars?
tlBig 4" 88% 19% 85% 75% 82%
"Big 411 plus 12% 21% 15% 24% 18%

.l
14. In the area af Fi rst
Ai d were you prov; ded wi th
infarmation concerning
primitive medicine?
Yes 62% 3J% 41% 43%, '36%
No 3B% 62% 59% 57% 64%
15. Can you tell me how
personal hygiene and sanita-
ti on caul d benefit you if
you were a pri soner?
Adequate 75% 30% 55% 35% 40%
Inadequate 25% 70% 45% 65% 90%
16. What will be done for
yaur family if you are
taken prisoner?
it
Dan't Know 80% 85% 82% 82% 48%
Nothing 04% 05% 03% 03% 36%
..;
Adequate 02% 05% 05% 06% . 15%

17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per G-II-7
~
Fort Jackson.
•
. 82d Abn 01 v SEec1al Farces
AIT/BeT EM Offi cers .. EM Officers.
17. How would you resist

ene~ interrogation?
a. Maintain silence. 48% 62% 47% 33% . 06%
b. t~ainta;n silence
until subjected to pain
then re1 ate anything. 12% 07% 07% 03% 17%
'.
c. Resist then lie
to deceive. 26% 14% 35% 15% 27%
do Re 1ate a precan-
ceived cover story. 12% 14% 12% 39% 43%
18. How many types of
feod would be available
(under survival condi-
t; ens) in the jungl es of
S0utheast As; a1 ..
...'
Adequate 30% 10% 35% 35% 45%

Inadequate 70% 90% 65% 65% , 55%
19. I f captured ; n South-
east 'Asia what type of con-
finement would you anti-
ci pate?
a. Compeund inNa~·th
Vietnam. 25% 14% 18% 12% 64%
..
b. Permanent camp in
South Vietnam. 04% 14% 09% Q3% 00%
c. Compeund in China 05% 03% 06% 06% 00%
d. Mebi 1e camp i'n

Southeast As; a. 70% 55% 88% 72% 91%
17-Apr..2009
This document has
Army letter dated March 5, 2009 G-II-8
Fort' Jackson
•
82d Abn Div Seecl a1 Farces
EM Officers EM Officers
AIT IBCT
-
20. What disease(s) would
represent the greatest
threat to your health while
interned? Only d'iseases mentioned by a significant
partion of any of the groups were malaria
~.
and dysentary.
21. Designate which of
the following subjects areas
'. wi 11 be of greatest impor-
tance ta you if interned.
(List in order of im-
portance. )
a. First Aid and
primitive medicine. 2 2 3 2 2
b. Physical Training. 5 5 4 5 ~
c. Survival; escape,
and evasion. 1 1 1 1 1
d. Personal hygiene
and san; tat; on. 3 3 2 3 3
e. Cede af Conduct. 4 4 5 4 il
f. Geneva and Hague
Convent; ons. 6 6 6 6 6
22. How WQuld you antic-
i pate· the trea.tllEnt you "
would t:eceive at the hands
of the Viet Cong ar North
VietnallEse?
,. a. Tarture 72% 55% 47% 65% 09%
b. Execution 26% 14% 18% 33% 09%
:Co
c. Intensive Inter-
rogation '88% 05% 71% 78% 55%
17-Apr-2009
This document has
Army letter dated March 5, 2009 G-II-9 .
• Fort· Jackson 82d Abn Div
• Seec1a1 Forces
AITlBCT
-
tM Officers EM
-
,,00%
Off1 cer:,s
d~ Good Care 06% 07% 00% 09%
e. Starvation, No Care 59% 35% 34% 45% 18%
f. Other 00% 00% 00% 00% 00%
23. Would you anticipate
different types of care at . "
the hands of the NVN as

opposed to the Viet Cong?
Yes 38% 45% 76% 34% ~2%
No 62% 47% 18% 39% 06%
24. Which of the following
foods wti>u1d be best to eat
for your health?
a. Rice 23% 24% 28% 30% 18%,
b. Fish 20% :i5% 17% 12% 18%
c. Meat 47% 47% 48% 72% 55%
d. Green Vegetables 51% 59% 48% 72% 73%
e. "Potato" tubers 08% 06% 07% 03%' 18%
f. Anyth";ng offered 09% 12% 31% 03~ 18%
25." Are the fal lowing safe
to eat? (Response indicates
percentage answering in
affi rmat i ve • )
a. t~onkey 80% 20% 40% 60% "70%
b. Raw FiSh 70% 15% 40% 45% 65%
c. " Raw Eggs 50% 40% 75% 80% 95%
d. Maggots 15% 02% 05% 15% "'15%
e. Poisonous Snakes 50% 10% 20% 40% 50%
17..Apr.. 2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per- G- II-10
• Fort Jackson
•
82d Abn Div S2eci a1 F9rces
AITIBeT m Officers EM
- Officers
26. What woul~ you do if

you SqWblood-in your 'stool: '
Adequ~te, 05,% 00% 00% 03% 28%
Inadequate 95% 100% 100%' 97% 72%
!'
27. Woul~ you take "pillsl1

if offe,red them by your
c~ptors1
Yes 10% 24% 71% 48% 91%

No' 90% 59% 29% ' 51% 09%
28. If Y9U saw worms in,

your ,St,091, would that in-
dicate:
a. You were very sick. 50% 48% ' 18% 48% 36%
b. Y9t,! wer:e near deqth. 01% 00% 00% 00% O(\)%
C. You were not serf- 33%,
o~sl.x ; ll. 26% - 34% 35% 33%
d. You·wil1 recover. 3Q% 17% 47% 18% 18%
29. If i~ter~ed in a PW I
camp wi thout ,pharmaceu~i ca 1, '

medicines, how would you
tre.a-t :,
a. Dysentary: All in~dequate - all grol,lps.
~. Borns: ~11 ,ina(jeq,uate - all groups.
c. Pneumonia: All, .inad,equate - all gro~ps.

'
i.
30. When·is
, the best time
,
to
escape: '
f:
A4equa~e 58% 24%
Ina~equate 36% 59%
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per G-II-ll
• Fprt Jacks.C!.n 82d Abn Div
• S~eci al Forces
-AITlBCT EM . -EM
Off; cers Officers
31. Based on your , "
answers to these questions.

do yau feel you cauld
survi ve an extended (1 "
year or more) internment
in the jungl es of South
Vietnam?
Yes 48% 45% 82% 81% i3%

No 52% 48% 18% 06% 18%
of NQrth Vietnam?
Yes 96% 28% 94% 88% .. 73%

No 37% 66%. 06% 06% 18%
'.
17-Apr-2009
This document has
EO 12958, as amended~ per
.-'
,G-II-12
• ANNEX III
•
FOlMER PRISONERS
. Of WAR QUESTIONNAIRE
.
1. Responses to I qUllttonnetre ~ispatched to US A~ repatriates of
1M 'tetn. conflict P"vt~ addttt ..al data. Although the size of the
• •le group WII U.t .... .,.. results of the quest1or'!na1 re are not .
in.....ct to present I cata.., ..ie.' analysis sf the impressions cenveyed
" In f ..... prts. .rs~ ,.ther, the responses and their inclusioo
....1' purpo..t to p.....t ......1 1ndicatiens prevalent alll9n9 these
f. . .·.. prisoners of wlr.
I. 11•••-, .t...,...... tt . . .tres were sent to individuals, only'
...1. Clllllllle.d ,.,. . . . returned. Thus. the s . .le provides any-
.tn. but coach.he f.ct. ...e.... the responses are indicative of
trlining ,rogr. des._"
......1 t . . . .t Itt.t~ tn regard to the Code of Conduct and the Anny
.rtng intarw.lftt.
to ,repare soldiers to survive and resist
.te
3. _nltf • •' " ns..... OCcu..Nd between 18 March 1971, the
the questt"'lt ....... s.t, and 27 ...n 1971. the date on which
.... lilt CGIIPletlid'q_tt.lfre WIS recetved.
17-Apr..2009
This document has
-been declassified lAW
EO 12958, as amended, per' G-U 1... 1
. Army letter dated March 5, 2009
• CGrnposite Statistics,
•
1. By whom ",ere you held prisoner?
a. North 'Vietnam (NVA), 17%
b. South Vietnam (ve) ,59%
c. Both NVA and VC 8% ~ " ,
d. National Liberation Front 17%

2. How long were you held captive?
a. Less,than 12 months , ,
..... , '
b,' More than 12, but less than 36 months

c. More than 36 months
3. When did you receive Code of Conduct ,training:
,"t.
a. BCT
b. AIT
c. Officer Basic Course
d. In your unit
e. In all the above
4. What type of instruction did you receive on the Code of Conduct
prior to your captivity?
a. Classroom lecture 67%
b. Practical exercise (in conjunction with sur-
vival, escape, evasion, and res;s',tance) 8%
,c. Both lecture and practical exercise 25%
d. Don I t remenber
5. Did you receive any specialized training on the Code of Conduct as
a part'of a specialized school (e.g., Special Forces)?
Yes 17%
NQ 83%
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW G-I11-2
•
6. The following statement should be answered yes or no according to
your awn understanding of the Code.
US servicemen who ar~ captured are legally respensible
under the Uniferrn Code of Military Justice fer their
actions while prison~rs.
Yes 67%
Ne 33%
7. Article V of the Code of Conduct states that a prisoner will "evade ll
answering questions (other than to give his na ri1e, rank, service number,
II
and date of birth) te the utmos t of his ab i1 i ty. Answer "yes" or IIno"
II 1/
accerding ta your ~ understanding of Article V:

a. A PW may nat under ~ny circumstances divulge more than his
name, rank. service number, ~nd DOB.
Yes 33%
No 67%
b. A prisoner should ~sist giving additional information up to
the point of physical mistre~tment at the hands of his captors.
Yes
No
c. A prisoner should resist briefly and then lie in order to

confuse and harass the enemY.
Yes 33%
No 67%
d.· A prisoner should resist up until the point when resistance
~ is no lenger possible. He should then give truthful answers to whatever
questions he can no longer avaid answering.
Yes 8%
No 92%
17..Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW G-III-3
•
8. List in order of value (1 thru 6), the kinds Qf ,tra·ining which
would have proven of the greatest value to you· during your status' as
a PW. (The item you consider the most valuable should be marked with
a Ill"; the second mO"st valuable with a "2" and so on, down to "6 ....)
a. Instructi,n on the nature of Communism 3
b. Evasion an'd escape techniques 1
c. Techni~ues of PW organization w~i1e in
capti vity '. 5
d. Techniques
.
of interrogation
.
resistance 2
e. Sanitation and health 4.
f. Code of Conduct training 6
9. In your understanding, are captured US military personnel permitte.d
to give the information required on the Red Cross' "Capture Card," al,;.
though this information goes beyond name, rank, service number, and OOB?
Yes 25%
No .42%
.:
Not familiar with capture card 33%

10. Did your captors mention the US Code of Conduct while you:~ere in
captivity? If so, in whiCh of the following situations did it occur?
a. To tell you it violates the Geneva Convention. ~%
. -
b. To make you feel that you had been disloyal
. te your coun try. 0% .
c. To see if you knpw what your country ex-
pected of you.- 17'10
d. To convince you that the Code meant something
-different fromwhatyeu thought it did. -. . 25%
e. Oi d not ment; on Cede. 50%
11. In your training, were you taught what t~chniques the Communists
employ against prisoners ef war'l
Yes. 25%
No 75%
17-Apr-2009
This document has
been declassified lAW G-I1 1-4
•
12. Did you consider yourseif properly trained in what your govern-
ment expected of you (Code of Conduct) at the time of your capture?
Yes 50%-
No 50%
13. Which one or mere of-the fo1iowing actions do yau censider viola-
tions of the Code of Conduct?
a. Statements by USPW's that the enemy treats PW's well.
Yes 17%
No 83%
b. Statements by USPW's that the war is unjust and should be
ended.
Yes
No
c. Television or film ~ppearances in which a USPW expresses a de-
s; re for an i mmedi ate cessat; on of host; 1; ti es •
.Yes 58%
No 42%-
d. Discussion with an interrogator/indoctrinator about the

merits of capitalism versus Communism.
Yes 33%
No 67%
e. Discussing internment cenditions with the enefflY.
Yes 8%
No 92%
17..Apr-2009/
This document has
EO 12958, as amended, per G-III-5
.'
14. In ,your tra1nfns, wery! you instructed in method$, to' resist :1h- "', .. ' "
terrogation and indoctrination beyond 'dependence upori name, rank, ser1al
number, and DOB?
Ves 17%
No . 83%
. , '
15. Censidar1ng your PW exp~rience, which of the fallowing methods of

iristructisn should be used in teaching .the ~de Of Conduct?" .~
a. Lecture 33%
b. Seminar (Open discussion among trainees) 67%

c. PraCtical application (placing st'u'dent';n a
II moc k" inte mment situati o~) . 83%
16. Censidering all your Army training, indicate hew well it prepared
yau, in, the event of capture, to counter the treatment yau would re-
cei ve as a PW and to survive the ordeal.
a. Excellent ' ,0%
b. Good .. 25%
c. Adequate 0%
.r
d. Less 'than adequate 17%
e. Poor 42%
f. Useless 171
17. In your training, which of the following would have benefitted
you most in preparatien for internment? .
a. More emphasis on prison camp routine~ 67%
b. Mare subjects presented. 50%
c. More- time allotted to specific subjects. 58%
d. Mare practical field exercises~ 50%

e. More physical training. 8%
17-Apr-2009
This document has
by
f. '~are
•
em!)has is on the protect; on afforded
the Geneva Convention.
'. 8%
;'
17%
18. In order of value (l thru 6) which of the following do you fe~l
would best assist the soldier in survival, escape, and evasion.
a. Provide greater emphasis an the geographical
area in which the survival experience will ITKl)st
likely take place. 2
b. Increase the emphasis placed (m.practical

• field exercises involving'survival techniques. 3
c. Provi de greater expasure to classroom
instruction in techniques of survival. 6
d. Increase the training in the area af

pri mi ti ve fi rs t ai d ,and prevent; ve medi ci ne. ' , 4
','
e. Increase the emphasis placed on the varia-

tions in diet that may be experienced in a survival
situation and nutritional value of cer~ain foods. ' 1
f. Increase the emphasis on land navigational

techn; ques. 5
19. What farm of training did you receive in the area of surviv~l. escape,
resistance, and evasion? '
a. Lecture 75%'
b. Seminar (apen discussion among trainees) 8%

c. Practical applica~;0n (placing student in a
simulated s1tuatiGm) 17% '
d. Don t remenber
I
j
0%
e. Film 8%
17-Apr-2009
This document has
". •
'20. When considered in comparison with other training you 'h~ve'received.
how would you rate the survival, escape, resistance, and evasion trai~-'
ing you received? .:
a. Better than any of the other areas of

Amr:J tralning received. 8%
b. As good as any other Army training re~eived 8%
c. About average for Army training. 17%
d. Less effective, or complete, than the
oth'er areas af training recehed. '17%
e. Far inferior to most of the other train-
ing received. 33%
f. Tne least effective of any Army training 8%
21. In order of val ue (1 thru 5). whi ch of the following do you feel
would benefit the individual sBldier in the area of resisting ~nemy ,
; nterrogati on and i ndoctrinati on techn; ques: " "
a. Provide simulated compound training desi~ned
to expose the serviceman to the nature of the threat
he will face. ,- 1
b. Increase classroom'presentation 'th'at "
provides information on the Communist methods of"
interrogation and indoctrination. '3
c. Training that is directed to providing
the serviceman with techniques which may be .
effectively used in. organizing resistance in a
PW comp9und. ' , '2
d. Nutritional guidance oriented to provide
the serviceman with ~nfQrmation concerning the
relative value of foods that may be encountered
whi le interned. 4
e. Increased emphasis on physical training. 5
22. In order of value (1 thru 3) which of the following do you feel
would benefit the individual soldier in the area of escape and evasion:
17-Apr-2009
This document has G-III-8
•
a. Spend more time training in th"e field in
s1mulated escape and evasion circumstances.
• 2
b. Place more emphasis on the classroom
instructian of escape and evasion training. 3
c. Direct evasion and escape training to the
area af the world in which the individual will
most likely be invalved. 1
23. List subject areas that were not considered in the training that
you feel could be of value:
a. Resistance of interrogation/indoctrination 33%
b. Study of comparative political systems 25%

c. Psychologi cal aspects of impri senment 25%
d. Nutritional aspects of imprisonment 8%
e. Preventati ve medi ci ne 8%
17-Apr-2009
This document has
• ANNEX IV
BASIC AND ADVANCED OFFICER COURSES POI
1. The following charts represent a schematic display of the number
of hours devoted to SERE and SERE-rel ated subjects under the auspices
of the various Basic Officer Courses and Advanced Officer Courses. The
f1.gures offer some i ndi cati on of the importance deemed each subject
by each course.
2. Attached as Inclosure a is a display of the hours "devoted to the
pertinent subjects as Basic Officer Courses. Inclosure b represents
a the analysis of the Advanced Officer Course program.
Inclosu"res:
a. Basic Officer Course Analysis
b. Advanced Officer Course Analysis
17-Apr-2009
{- This document has
G-IV-l
• Inclosure a
•
BASIC OFFICER COURSB ANALYSIS
NUMBER OF KOURS OFFERED IN SERE-RELATED SUBJECTS
Geneva' Sut'Vival First Aid

Branch
School
. Code of
Conduct
Land Kalil•
Naviitatien Conventions
Evasion & Field
& Escape Sanitation
Military
Juetice
<!.
Infantry. 0 22 2 2 6 2
,~,
Artillery 1 23 2 0 3 3
Air Defena. I 6 3 2 2 1
Armor 0 '21 ll , 0 3* 3 2
Enain.er 0 26 0 17 1 1/2 2
Chelllical 3 9 .5 24' 12
b 3
Ordinance • 8 0 2* 3 7
!!Aad Svc 1 9 2 5 3 11
:T,rana * 12 a 1 1* 2 5
IS1.&na1 1 6 1 5 0 3
,
!Q.M. 1 5 2 1 r2 7
IHil Police 0 5 2 1 2 29
1M1.1 Intel 1** 8** I t111
* 7** 3** 9**
Chaplaio 1 14 0 1/2 0 4
1Ad1 General 1 6 2 1 2 3
NOTES: * Iotegrated with Code a - Text Assignments Incl
and Geneva Convention b - Integrated w/other subjects
** Projected
17-Apr-2009 G-IV-a-l
This document has
• Inclosure b
ADVANCED OFFICER OOURSE ANALYSIS
NUMBER OF HOURS OFFERED IN SERE-RELATED SUBJECTS
Geneva & Survival First Aid

Branch Code of Land Hague Evasion & Field Military
Scboo1 Conduct Havillatien Conven tiona & Escane Sanitation Justice.
Infantry 1 30 z 1 10 9a
Artillery 0 4 2 1 I 7
Air Defe.nae I 0 1 2 0 15
Armor 0 19b 0 3* 0 12
!
Engineer 0 Oc 0 1* 3 6
Chemical 1* 10 1* 8 22d 7
Ordinance * 5 0 2* 2 8
Med Svc 1 6 2 0 12 5
Trans
., lOb 2 1* 3 4
SilUlal 0 Oc 0 1 0 6
i O• M• I 4 0 1 0 4
Mil Police 0 0 4 1 3 6
Mil Intel 2 0 3 1* 0 11
Chat/lain 1/2 0 - 5 0 2 112*
Ad1 General 1 6 2 1* 0 6
C & GS - - 3 - - 6
NOTES: 111: Integrated'li'itb Code a - Includea International ~

and Geneva C:onventions b - Includea Text Assignments
it. Projected
c
d
-
-
P888 by Ex. .
Integrated w/otber subjects
G-IV-b-l
17-Apr-2009
This document has

ACN15596 Final Study Vol02 Pt03

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ACN15596 Final Study Vol02 Pt03

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Description of document: US Army Developments Command, Special Operations

Agency Report: Doctrine for Captured/Detained United

Requested date: October 1998

Released date: August 2009

Posted date: 17-November-2009

Source of document: Defense Technical Information Center

The other files available on governmentattic.org are:

AD-521594, Final Study, Volume I: Executive Summary – 1.7 MB

Final Study, Volume II: Main Report Part I – 13.1 MB

AD-521595, Final Study, Volume II: Main Report Part II – 14.1 MB

AD-521597, Final Study, Volume III – 5.3 MB

AD-521598, Final Study, Volume IV – 6.6 MB

DOCTRIIE FOR CAPTURED/DETAilED UNITED STATES

( Short Title: USPOW (U) )

APPENDIX A, STUDY DmECTIVE

been declassified lAW

( Short Title: USPOW (U) )

APPENDIX A, STUDY DIRECTIVE

USACDC CONTROL NUMBER CDCSOA-S-0200-72

Appendix H - 9iscussian/Analysis Appendix:- Pre-Internm~nt Ph,ase

TITL~ PAG~ . . .' i

TASLE .. OF CONTENTS. .. iii

Fl GURES. • •. ' . '. • • •..• • • '. ,., ": .• vi

APPENDIX D - ,(U) Reference 0-1.

·APP~NDIX' E' - (U) Distribut1on . . ,• "

APPENDIX 6 • (U) ·Data • • . • , •• " • G-1 '

.... ' ..."

Attached as Annexes to th1S Appenalx are ~he following documents:

b~ Dther assumptions deemed necessary will be approved by this Head-

f. Input from other servlces and governmental agencies may be.oQtained

(4) Coordination Draft: Nine mont~s after commencement of study.

I Incl /S/ A. J. DOMBHOWSKI

,. Proposed Department of Defense Di~ective: DOD Program for Captured .

10. Fl,eet Intelligence Center, Pacific. SurviVal, Evasion, ReSistance,

12. DOD Directive 51U5.18, 25 August 1959, Department of Defense Com-:

been declassified lAW

1. Keference: Letter, HQ USACDC, dated 16 Feb 70. subject as above

, Inc' lSI J •• T. SCRUGGS

(3,Interviews and consultations ~1th other s~]ected US military

(5), Input by other military services.

(2) Final draft of the,'study will be distributed 2 months' after

4. (U) CONTRACT SUPPORT REQUIRED

(2) TDY: $4,600.00

(Z) With nan-CDC organizations - Requests for replies to specific

. 11. (U) CORRELATION

fl .. _1tt \II. 1 _til

Current Responsibilities, Policies, and Procedures.

Gaps, Conflicts, Inconsistenciesc

Development of Army Doctrine by Phase.

Development of Joint- Doctrine.

(a) In:timi dation. Intimi dati on is used to' degrade psy-

military/political/economic goals. They expend considerably more

(4) ~IHAT RESISTANCE TECHNIQUES, IF ANY it WILL LESSEtl THE EFFECTS

1. Discuss .passive resistance techniques with fello~/'

3.. Eat everything the captor provides and supplement

- , 2'. Categori~s of captured civilian personnel enti.t1ed

!,. Functiens of' the"pretect1 ng' power. -

Red Cross. ...fie . Functions 9f the Intematienal CMmittee of the

. (b) Asecand series"of conventiens te which the United

1. 'Evasion (FH 21-76).

!. Code of Conduct (n1 21-76, Ft1 21-13, Ff 4 21-75).

i. Geneva and Hague Conventions {OA Pam 27-1}.

,(2) WHAT PROGIWlS CURRENTLY EXIST TO ASSIST THE flEXT OF Kit!